The Problem of the Appurtenance of Dobruja Region, 1913-1940

CEU eTD Collection Second Reader: Professor Constantin Iordachi Supervisor: Professor Balazs Trencsenyi The problem of the appurtenance of Dobruja region, 1913 region, of Dobruja appurtenance the of The problem Bulgarian and Romanian methods of claiming rights over the over rights of claiming methods Romanian and Bulgarian In partialIn fulfillment ofthe requirem Central European University Ana History Department Budapest, Hungary Master Artsof - Submitted to Teodora Kurkina territory 2013 By

ents for theents degree of

- 1940: 1940: i

CEU eTD Collection not be made without the written Author.not bemadepermission ofthe the without with accordance in made copies Further made. copies such any of part a form should page This librarian. the from obtained be may Details library. European Central the part or full in either process, any by Copies Author. the with remains thesis the of text the of Copyright

, can be be can , m ade

only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in lodged and Author the by given instructions the with accordance in only

these instructions may instructions these ii

CEU eTD Collection Romanian occupation of the Southern par Southern the of occupation Romanian Romanian the in issue vital becamea1878, in Berlin Treatyof the of signingemerging the firstafter question, DobrujanThe Dobru over claims their justifying in side Bulgarian the and Romanian the by employed strategies propaganda the of evaluation the is thesis current the of focus The Romania andSecond War. political reshapedmap after World the the end the brought that influence external the on but participants, the of skills the on Great important as Bu the reflecting evidence explored are views Their sides. both from debate territorial the the of by produced participants texts the through seen is rights the claiming of process the research, the In nation and state competing programsmodernization andl the Romanian featuring and Bulgarian propaganda, the for nationalistic playground the into province the transformed followed

Powers. The thesis states that the result of the division of the region depended mostly not not mostly depended region the of division the of result the that states thesis The Powers. lgarian and Romanian policies in the region andregionthe in policies Romanian and lgarian - Bulgarian relations once again after the second Balkan war and the and war Balkan second the after again once relations Bulgarian egitimization of the egitimization territorial rights. Abstract t of the region, Cadrilater. A territorial exchange that exchange territorial A Cadrilater. region, the of t

ja region in 1913 in region ja

their interactions with interactions their - building projects, projects, building o Greater to - 1940. iii

CEU eTD Collection paths Bulgarian oftheRomanian and discourses nationalistic Professor Trencsenyi, Balazs supervisor, advice my andguided whose critiquemethrough the Ithesis. owe deeply to: m helped works written and assistance personal whose students, acknowle My Evren S theleastAnd last, not but Tamaspatience Kisbali, whohad tor writing process Ana provedencouragement, supplies Sekulic, whosefood tobevery inthe supportand helpful oftime hislife Ved and mycolleagues, andfriends supporters suggestions dealing in Bulgarian andwith my help sources whowasProfessorready always Roumen Daskalov, with recommendations, toprovide me me toimprove my thesis Iordachi,Professor w Constantin my reader, second ran Bileta,ran my soul unnetcioglu dgements are split and go in seven in go and split are dgements

, who brought, who inthe hours meofdire hiscomputer need

- mate, andsacrificing whospent lastdays his withmetext editing my the

Acknowle ead andhelp me toproducereadable texts my translations

d parts gments hose pushed works instructions and personal –

to the professors and to my colleagues my to and professors the to

gety o copih the accomplish to greatly e

iv -

CEU eTD Collection Chapter I. Theory, propaganda and integration:Dobruja. approaching Chapter I.Theory, propaganda Introduction Bibliography Dobrujar Conclusions. or observers? tomodernization thepublic paths ForeignChapter in audienceand IV. sphere. Conductors creating propaganda. Chapter dispute Dobrujan 1913 III.The in Dobruja, application 1913 BulgaChapter and II.Romanian 3. General theoretical framework. 2. Literature review. 1. Concepts and terminology. 3. Shaping modernity: the results Romanian of andBulgarian justification of the claims over Dobruja. 2. Administering Dobruja: foreign policy goals and propagandistic methods applied. 1. Taking sides: the international reaction and its outcomes. 3. national identity, religious boundaries and linguistic ties. 2. Conceptualizing the borders Bulgarianof andRomanian nationalism: re 1. Exploring roles the of the participants: voicesthe of individuals in the making theof dispute 2. Shifting ethnical boundaries: homogenization processes in the region. 1. Contesting culture and transforming identities: Bulgarian and Romanian state projects...... Creating images one of another: “The warof caricatures”

......

...... eshaped.

...... - 1940.

......

...... rian nationalisms,rian nation Table of Table

...... - ...... 1940: claiming1940: ...... Contents ......

......

...... rights over the territory overrights the and

- building strategiesbuilding their and ......

...... - constructing history, ......

......

110 106

103 ... .

83 55 35

97 86 77 64 57 48 38 30 24

9 1

9 v

CEU eTD Collection avoid to order 4 In p. 1. 2002, Pittsburg, (Dobruja). English and (Dobroudja) 3 French material. (Dobrudscha), ofthe quoted withthe exception predominantly used versionis English the text this in misinterpretation German (Dobruca), Turkish 2 1 land r the passed Berlin of congress thebeginningBulgaria War. from World Second 1878upto ofthe mak would charactermultinational its in legacyexpressed Ottoman wars”. the 1878, and 1768 ba militaryand corridor transit a as servedprovince Between Europe. Southeastern in bastions military Muslim advanced 15 Iordachi Constantin province, the of character individualized highly landscape. cultural and geographical social, distinct its with region a remains r A

G. Danescu, Danescu, G. Ibidem Constantin Iordachi, Constantin vn h nm o te ertr isl i seld ifrnl i Rmna (orga, ugra ( Bulgarian (Dobrogea), Romanian in differently spelled is itself territory the of name the Even лъжата, защотовсичколъжата, преди тр th "Аз съм готов"Аз зацелта даупотребявсичкитестрашни подлостта и средства, освен “To reach“To the elatively narrow strip of strip narrow elatively

century, Dobrogea functioned as a borderland of the Ottoman Empire and one of the most most the of one and Empire Ottoman the of borderland a as functioned Dobrogea century, remaining with remaining 3

h Otmn oto oe Dbua atd ni 1 until lasted Dobruja over control Ottoman The The author also admits that, probably, the most disti most the probably, that, admits also author The treason i a ues tre fr h cmeig nation competing the for target uneasy an it e

Dobrogea (La Dobroudja). Étude de Géographie physique et ethnographique et physique Géographie de Étude (La Dobroudja). Dobrogea , since we are humans first, andonlyaft , since first, we are humans

aim I am ready to employ all the horrible measures,aim I amreadytoemploy except allthe horrible

Citiz

the enship, Nation and State and Nation enship, newly established Bulgaria. In return for the new the for return In Bulgaria. established newly land stretching from the Black S Black the from stretching land

egion with the Danube Delta to Romania, to Delta Danube the with egion ябва да сме човеци, после вече българи ипатриоти."вечеябва сме после да човеци, българи Introduction Introduction Христо Hristo Botev - Building: The Integration of Northern Dobrogea into Romania, Romania, into Dobrogea Northern of Integration The Building:

Ботев ttlefield in the long series of Russian of series long the in ttlefield

, er andpatriots Bulgarians that

the peculiar feature of the provincethat the peculiarof featurethe

7, hn h Get P Great the when 878, nct characteristic of Dobruja wa Dobruja of characteristic nct - ulig rjcs f oai and Romania of projects building ea to the Lower Danube, Dobruja Dobruja Danube, Lower the to ea

ons u ta “from that out points

the Southern part of the the of part Southern the

possession, Romania Romania possession,

for treacheryfor and ,

Bucarest, Bucarest, 1 2

Describing the Describing wr a the at owers 1903, p.16 1903, .” Добруджа -

Turkish s its its s the

), ), 1

CEU eTD Collection ertr hl b Blai ws eue, oig h Romanian the moving reduced, was Bulgaria by held territory a social and population the characterof mixed the asbigger well gainsconsiderthe as had territorial to politicians Romanian Ionthe Danube, saw Bratianu itasa while vita from away Russia keep could that boundary a primarily as Dobruja viewed Kogalniceanu Mihail ci Russia; to Bessarabia cede to had capitalism) of period the during Bulgarians of material culture the about information материали 10 9 1919 1940 8 Past, the Debating 7 6 Michelson in E. found Paul 5 region the affected Tatars and Turks of consisted population not (although majority the 1880 around Romania: Dobruja. lands new the of “colonization” the of principle in Dobruja Northern of conditions of regime the during especially Stambolo Bulgaria, while “Romanization” of attempts aggressive qu foreignRomanian that thearea in Antonina Kuzmanova situation beforedescribes briefly thepolitical 1913,underlining A. Kellog, F. Iordachi, Danescu, oe motn dtis bu cnrvris n h Rmna pltcl ie rcdn te events the preceding life political Romanian the in controversies about details important Some o frhr eal aot h Romanian the about details further For rcles of rcles cl tre fo ucrany n vague and uncertainty from turned ickly Кузманова - A Kuzmanova, /A. 1940 oprn te taei vle f No of value strategic the Comparing Dobruja with its mixed people mixed its with Dobruja

), Sofia,1989, ), Citizenship, Nation and State and Nation Citizenship, orga L Dobroudja) (La Dobrogea The road to Romanian independence Romanian to road The (1886 v

the

към ,

Romanian political elite. Frederick Kellogg notes that Romanian Foreign Minister Minister Foreign Romanian that notes Kellogg Frederick elite. political Romanian От

h tet o San of treaty the веществената

Modern Bulgarian history from S from history Bulgarian Modern

Ньой - 1894) rm eil t Caoa t Craiova: to Neuilly From to

n h peiu decades, previous the in p

до , policy .20 Romania, Conflict and crisis. Romanian political development, 1861 development, political crisis. Romanian and Conflict 7

Крайова re t rvre h efcs f h Bri tet, on bc to back going treaty, Berlin the of effects the reverse to tried - 21

d oiia tension political nd култура

strategies regarding strategies - Stefano. :

, - also takes in takes also Building Вопросът 5 1903, 1903,

thi - на ugra rltos du relations Bulgarian s could not be easily incorporated either in Bulgaria or Bulgaria in either incorporated easily be not could s s requirement, however, aroused however, requirement, s

българите , , Purdue 8 p ,

p e usin f oten orj i te nentoa relations, international the in Dobruja Southern of question he odci hl aayig h policy the analyzing while Iordachi Pittsburg, 2002, p 2002, Pittsburg, .15

10 за tambolov to Zhivkov to tambolov . -

20, 20, Южна l region forl region vn n 90 fe sgiiat hne ta had that changes significant after 1930 in Even to account those facts, highligh facts, those account to r

University, West Lafayette, 1995 Lafayette, West University, 22,4% of the whole Dobrujan population (that (that population Dobrujan whole the of 22,4% thern in s positive and negative reactions towards the the towards reactions negative and positive

през Христо the newly received province and its population its and province received newly the

ht dominated that

Добруджа h region. the h dominant the

orj to Dobruja периода

ig Stambol ring p Вакарелски free navig . 6 - 2011. Budapest, , 10

на в

международните

fe te T the After капитализма

- ugra fote t Silistra. to frontier Bulgarian

ht f oten Bessarabia, Southern of that part

/ ation on theDanube.ation on vs r se omn Daskalov, Roumen see era ov’s Khristo Romanian politics towards towards politics Romanian ,

) of the North Dobrujan Dobrujan North the of ) Sofia, - great controversy in the in controversy great 1871

,p V

et o Berlin of reaty .New York, 1989. .New York, p 1964 akarelski kapitalizma (Dobruja: (Dobruja: kapitalizma . 199 . t

ing, however, the the however, ing, f nerto of integration of

отношения . p. 9 . - 201 of 1878 can be be can 1878 of ,

Добруджа 6

, 1919 ,

the the

in 2 : -

CEU eTD Collection strikingly diverse population and a major Muslim Turkish and Tatar element Tatar and Turkish Muslim major a and population diverse strikingly visible intheregion.still populat Muslim its of remains several with Bulgarian divided 20 the of middle bythe and territory, the over rights their justify to Bulgaria tongue. inhabita the of part made already membersofone as bu group, national same the to belong always not did neighbors their that knew Dobruja of inhabitants etc) Lipovan Greek, the as well (as Romanian and Bulgarian The faith. Muslim its by Mu ofthe structure theethnic on researches) 14 Folgeprobleme und die Banat 13 12 11 religious to appealed population, local the of origin of concepts the and identity national characterized fa certain omitting and highlighting pr they how identifying etc) writers authors Bulgarian and Romanian leg of methods Bu and Romania between exchange territorial constant when of attempts the and region explor Bulgaria to back (Cadrilater) Dobruja of part Southern the gives which treaty, Craiova the territory the over control full gained state Romanian the when 1940 in Bulgaria and Romania states, national neighboring two by shared territory homogeneous highly

For Vintila Mihailescu, Andrea Andrea It should be noted that before 1913 there did not exist any precise data (archival evidence or ethnographic ethnographic or evidence (archival data precise any exist not did there 1913 before that noted be should It

further ed and analyzed orj hd to had Dobruja The 11

. Incurrent the . Schmidt Rossler Schmidt ewe to egbrn states neighboring two between

ties The

details research focuses research

n atmtd o utf te oiy f igitc homogenization linguistic of policy the justify to attempted and situation had been changing been had situation religious religious tmzn cam oe te land the over claims itimizing

see La Dobroud La

Кузманова

. , thesis

community. Rumänien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg : die G die : Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach Rumänien rce a og way long a proceed 12 , Frankfurt am Mein, 1994, p 1994, , amFrankfurt Mein,

the , ja,

on the propagandistic questions in the deba the in questions propagandistic the on Roma the ,

От Bucuresti, 1938, p. 620. For further details see the graphs in the supplement. supplement. the in graphs the see furtherdetails p. 620. For 1938, Bucuresti, two states to “nationalize” the “nationalize” to states two

from the period 1913 period the from Ньой cts not suitable for the nation the for suitable not cts t o Getr oai) osdrd uks is mother its Turkish considered Romania) Greater of nts slim population, which is viewed mostly as “Turkish” or simply defined defined simply or “Turkish” mostlyas whichviewed is population, slim

nian до sne ad constructed and esented

Крайова bcm ams prl ehial Rmna and Romanian ethnically purely almost became , -

Bulgarian dispute over the land land the over dispute Bulgarian gradually due to the attempts of both Romania and Romania both of attempts the to due gradually

f ery centu a nearly of

p /Kuzmanova, .17 r explored are - ion left and some traces of traces some and left ion 26

- 1940

t they primarily saw the Dobrujan Muslims Muslims Dobrujan the saw primarily they t From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From

lgaria took place. took lgaria (historians, diplomats, politicians, diplomats, (historians, to renzziehung in der Dobrudscha und im und Dobrudscha der in renzziehung area ry to turn from a place with a a with place a from turn to ry through analyzing the texts of of texts the analyzing through 1940, the year of the signing of signing the of year the 1940, -

building program of the state, state, the of program building

the in the period of 1913 of period the in

itr o te region, the of history te concerning Dobruja Dobruja concerning te th evolvingfrom

century the region centurythe 13 In Ottoman culture Ottoman 14 .

, Sofia ,

h Dobrujan The in 1870s in the , 1989 , thesis the the thesis - 1913, 1913, 1940 1940

to a to

is is 3 , ,

CEU eTD Collection was more successful in claiming rights over the territory and does not tend to grant one one grant to tend not does and territory the over rights claiming in successful more was about the changes inthenationalistic discourses. nation Bulgarian and Romanian the with parallels variation century dispute thinks Revival 17 p. 16. London,1991, B in secularization 16 15 yoke” cultural 19 the of beginning the in already develop to begun Greekcommunities. and Romanian Serbian, the of that than later even developed sphere public Bulgarian sphere of beginning the in life cultural national nation, Bulgarian the of forming about and Ottomans the from independence full their gaining on propaganda triedtoincrease bothparties significance. its of the how of example an as merely as it sees but Bulgaria, and Romania both for region important the of on the as side province the regard not does debate, propagandistic Dobrujan the on concentrated although research, The power. theirexplanatory of terms in logical considered be will that issues problematic these to solutions several purp its however, context; larger a in dispute Dobrujan the to place unarguable

Janette Sampimon Janette Roumen Daskalov, Daskalov, Roumen e te xml o Vsl pio ad ugra sho i Gboo Jh Bl, “ Bell, John Gabrovo, in school Bulgarian and Aprilov Vasil of example the See , a virtual meeting space where opinions are formed are opinions where space meeting virtual a ,

T Up to the beginning of the 20 the of beginning the to Up of 1913 of nation

he current thesis does not seek to give fully exhaustive answers to the question of who of question the to answers exhaustive fully give to seek not does thesis current he of , Sofia,2002. , diverse

16 - T ulig rgas and programs building - 17 his affirmation may be argued as the era of the Bulgarian “national revival” had had revival” “national Bulgarian the of era the as argued be may affirmation his 1940 1940 ulgaria” .

, but one can hardly deny that it it that deny hardly can one but , Becoming Bulgarian Becoming Ако similar cases of claiming rights over the land. the over rights claiming of cases similar

се is viewed is

мисли in Gerasimos Augustinos, Augustinos, Gerasimos in

българското as part of the continuation of continuation the of part as , 2006, 253 , p. 2006, th

century, Romania and Bu and Romania century, put it it put

враждане the 19 the Janette Sampimon Sampimon Janette

n lre cnet big classif being context, larger a in Dvre ah t mdriy n otesen Europe” Southeastern in modernity to paths “Diverse th

century, no such thi such no century, , was the was София th - ulig rgas n te considerations the and programs building

century, separating itself from the “Greek “Greek the from itself separating century, ly politically, socially and economically and socially politically, ly , 2002 , ”. on on middle and especiall and middle

15 their national revival. national their

oe: “ notes: the / Roumen Daskalov, Daskalov, Roumen / Later the researcher adds that t that adds researcher the Later lgaria were more concentrated more were lgaria Romanian and Bulgarian 19 Bulgarian and Romanian

Hence, in the thesis appear thesis the in Hence, hr ws o Bulgarian no was There ng as a Bulgarian public public Bulgarian a as ng Modernization through through Modernization y the y How the Bulgarian Bulgarian the How ied s i t offer to is ose In her book book her In as end of the of end original he th 4 ,

CEU eTD Collection countries, born after the dissolution of the big empires in Eastern Europe, also leads a policy of of policy a leads also Europe, Eastern in empires big the of dissolution the after born countries, precisely very affairs of inthepoets scopes andhistorians used ofthe propagandaof the inthe20 beginning great a in resulted later which writing, historic of bloom literary The literature. well) as Romanian (and Bulgarian 19 21 romanesti nationale 20 p.141. 2008, Serban), 19 of consciousness and memory isno notexistthere if does nation Bulgarian the that say would benefactor” “a once that public the warning was who Vazov, Ivan of reaction appeara the connects author 18 in Macedoniaof theBalkana (after Second asresult August war 1913). important other having partially, just region the on concentrated were objectives Bulgarian Bulgaria Northwest in Vlachs the on not and empire Ottoman the within Aromanians it assimilate to Romanian a forming was sides both of target main inf and reach to was aim their that but politicians, and writers historians, among developing were debates ideological and territorial the that out propaganda state on education school of impact the explores also Murgescu Luminiţa popu its of unification national

Njagulov, op. cit., p. 146. p. 146. cit., op. Njagulov, Kiossev Mirela lgvs Njagulov, Blagovest th

etr ta bogt e ies n ntoa isiain to inspiration national and ideas new brought that century However, the situation was even more complex. complex. more even was situation the However, - Luminita Murgescu “ Murgescu Luminita ,

Bulgarian textbooks of literary history and the construction of national identity national of construction the and history literary of textbooks Bulgarian . Ne ”, 1831 ”,

Te Romanian “The

or a Bulgarian a or rtheless, it should be noted that „ that noted be should it rtheless, - 1878, 1878,

nce of the history of Bulgarian literature of Alexander Teodorov Alexander of literature Bulgarian of history the of nce

in his article in “Transborder identities” “Transborder in article his in Intre bunul crestin si bravul roman. Rolul scolii primare in construire in primare scolii Rolul roman. bravul si crestin bunul Intre Bucuresti,

to restrai to lation with the help of schools, the church, the church, the schools, of help the with lation - paigpplto o Bulgaria” of population speaking national 1999 n and stop the influence of influence the stop and n

identity amongst the Dobrujan population and later later and population Dobrujan the amongst identity

its literary heritage. heritage. literary its number of highly influential highly of number luence much much luence Romania Blagovest Njagulov describes the state state the describes Njagulov Blagovest

18 in Transborder identities (ed. by Stelu Stelu by (ed. identities Transborder in ’s interests were focused on the on focused were interests ’s :

wider layers of society. of layers wider

propaganda in order to prevent to order in propaganda led to the further development further the to led “ Bulgaria, as all nationalizing all as Bulgaria,

stimulate stimulate

. 1896, p 1896, . army…”. - Balan with the bitter bitter the with Balan

texts by texts the th p

. 355 . century. flourishing a identitatii identitatii a 19 , pointing pointing ,

” writers, writers, 357. The The 357. Mirela 20 21

goals and , The

5 -

CEU eTD Collection n lntee, n te ancestors the and lengthened, and refined, constructed, are descent national of “pedigrees where past”, reputed its nation reconstructing a of existence the legitimizing history, Greek in nationhood to 1870 Passages Macedonia blood. of hills wheat, of “Fields of Karakasidou book the Anastasia is structure theoretical its of terms in thesis the frames that sources main the of about dispute the in involved sides both by used strategies propagandistic the of comparison on based approach the determineparagraphs previous in outlined considerations The 1990” 23 22 curre the in studied thoroughly one the to similar cases of outcomes and reasons the or region the in situation general the of analysis of terms in it to connected or theme the to related directly works existing already of description the on merely concentra is chapter, methodological the of part making review, literature The thesis. the of parts following the in analysis thorough the for chosen texts and authors of selection the id “national actors”, “public asnotions “nation such of i employment of terms the of explanations the provides part this topic, the of investigation that terminology the of use the and concepts the of exploration the with Starting applied. approaches the and work the of arrangement the determine that issues theoretical the with deals chapter methodological first, The parts. thematic three and chapter participants from sides ofthethatare both taken debates as primary sources. not detail in regards however, thesis, current the state, a into territory contested a of integration of projects legitimation”.

Further description and analysis of the research framew research ofthe analysis and Furtherdescription Anastasia Karakasidou, Karakasidou, Anastasia , Chicago, 1997, p. p. 17 Chicago, , 1997, tutrly h tei i ognzd no or etos ht nld a methodological a include that sections four into organized is thesis the Structurally

the oral memories of the inhabitants of several Dobrujan locations, but the texts of the of texts the but locations, Dobrujan several of inhabitants the of memories oral the 23

Appealing to this work primarily as an example of the study of two competing two of study the of example an as primarily work this to Appealing - 90, hc dsrbs h poess f tr of processes the describes which 1990”, - building projects”, “state projects”, “modernization projects”, “modernization sphere”, “state “public building projects”, projects”,

“Fields of wheat, hills of blood. Passages Passages blood. of hills wheat, of “Fields

entity debates” and “propaganda”. It also includes the justification of of justification the includes Italso “propaganda”. and entitydebates”

f “ain bcm a eil fr majority for vehicle a become “nation” a of ork is viewed in the firstthe in is viewed ork - tt i te present the in state nt research, but on the ways of how those those how of ways the on but research, nt o ainod n re Mcdna 1870 Macedonia Greek in Nationhood to nfrig hsoy no national into “history ansforming

chapter. chapter. s essential for the further further the for essential s - day by teleologically teleologically by day

Dobruja. e not ted - 22 group group

One 6 -

CEU eTD Collection dispute over Macedonia between Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, and Bulgaria between Macedonia over dispute Banat, with parallels brief incorporates thesis the Macedonia, Greek in nationhood Iordachi examples by the proposed Using cases debates. comparable similar and dispute Dobrujan the between resemblances and differences the highlighting place, possible its establish to attempting and context larger a and literaturereview the in listed books from borrowed partially framework, theoretical general the clarifies chapter methodological The topic. chosen the of frames the in applied and exploited being are sources 29 the Balkans in nationalism and 28 Bendix, Reinhard M. see view general 27 Balkans 26 25 Iordachi, 24 an origin their and elites Bulgarian and Romanian of question The data. exact of sources trustworthy fullyas not but period, the of discourse” “patriotic general the of terms in th ideas, Romanian Romania confrontedeach other came when Romanian theterritory under control. Dobrujan the of conditions projects modernization Romanian state and nation of concepts Weber’s 19 in Dobruja in application their the in thoroughly investigated are that others methodologicalchapter itself. several and Vermosh and Naum St. over

For Bulgarian case see Roumen Daskalov, Daskalov, Roumen see Bulgarian case For Andr see further For details For detailed general analysis general detailed For E. Hobsbawn, E. cadr Marinov, Tchavdar h mkn o te French the of making The ,

As the attempts of creating homogeneous states were not characteristically Bulgarian and and Bulgarian characteristically not were states homogeneous creating of attempts the As nation Bulgarianand Romanian the depicts part thematic first The

Paris, 2010. Paris, Citizenship, Nation and State and Nation Citizenship, Nations and nationalism since 1780:pro since nationalism and Nations

Nationbuilding and Citizenship and Nationbuilding Weber Weber

e hegemonic claims of several of the participants of the debates are regarded are debates the of participants the of several of claims hegemonic e a usin aéoine e 94 ns or: omnse tainlse as les dans etnationalisme Communisme jours: nos à 1944 de macédonienne question La

djusted to the purposes of the current thesis, putting the Dobrujan case in a in caseDobrujan the putting thesis, current the of purposes the to djusted "Politics as a Vocation" a as "Politics ea Schmidt Rossler, Rossler, Schmidt ea , see Augusta Dimou, Dimou, Augusta see , , Budapest, 2009, p 2009, Budapest, , - disputes and explores how the state the how explores and disputes pns bre i te yees xlrd y ee Sahlin Peter by explored Pyrenees the in border Spanish

- Building 28 13 29 The making of a nation in the Balkans, in the a nation of making The -

90 Rlig atal o Hbbu’, edxs and Bendix’s Hobsbaum’s, on partially Relying 1940. , 2002, p.62002, , - o orj. h catr lo ecie te general the describes also chapter The Dobruja. to building , Rumänien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach Rumänien p Berkeley: University of California Press, 197 Press, ofCalifornia University Berkeley: . 48 . 24 Entangled paths towards modernity. Contextualizing Socialism Socialism Contextualizing modernity. towards paths Entangled

in Gerth and Mills. Mills. and Gerth in - n Krksdus nlss f h psae to passages the of analysis Karakasidou’s and 55 gramme, myth, reality myth, gramme, .

i atmt t cnet h Blain and Bulgarian the connect to attempts it , 26

From Max Weber Max From - the building projects of Bulgaria and and Bulgaria of projects building

, Cambridge, 1992, p 1992, Cambridge, , Yugoslavian

Budapest, 2004, p 2004, Budapest, , Frankfurt am Mein, 1994 amFrankfurt Mein, , - building strategies and and strategies building . New York, 1946 and and 1946 York, New . - 7 A

See . lbanian debate lbanian d role in the the in role d p. 15 p. p 25 . . 46

Constantin Constantin h later the - - 18, 57

for a for of

CEU eTD Collection h clai the re when used arguments of basis the on analyzed be debate. the of participants the by used approaches and methods the with deals that part following the in explored attentively later and chapter this in briefly viewed is opinion public the of formation Кузманова 31 bulgare 30 rightsbe and Dobruja outlined ofoutcomes. seen over its will interms Great Eu in situation political general the of consequence a as more but states, two the of methods propaganda the from independent partially outcome an as seen is debates att Romanian and Bulgarian the of “success” the with dealing one the is part this in viewed and put be to question main The province. the of projects modernization competing their inventing were who states, Bulgarian and Romanian si this how explain to seeks than it powers, foreign the from support the of Bulgarian investigation the the to reaction with international Beginning sphere. public the in audience foreign and region processgrowinggradually undertaken. of mutual hostilityare viewed. be will Dobruja Southern of annexation after another one of caricatures of creation the to 1913 before understanding mutual from proceeding of route the that, After language. the on emphasis the and ties religious

o smlr ae td i Bu in study case similar For h itrainl iuto fo te ugra pit f iw is view of point Bulgarian the from situation international The

” powers. , in , Strategies of assimilations, extracted assimilations, of Strategies The last chapter of the thesis is dedicated to the role of the modernization projects in projects modernization the of role the to dedicated is thesis the of chapter last The

s te s o te ocps f ainl dniy n oii, h apa t common to appeal the origin, and identity national of concepts the of use the ms, , Etudes Balcaniques, Etudes От

Ньой 31

In the conclusion of the chapter, the evolution of the whole process of claiming of process whole the of evolution the chapter, the of conclusion the In

до

Крайова - thinking and re and thinking gra ltrtr se . Stanch R. see literature lgarian

Sofia,1994,

several important factors listed in the second thematic chapter: the the chapter: thematic second the in listed factors important several / A. Kuzmanova, A.Kuzmanova,

nr. 3 nr. - oain ipt, n atmt o bt sds o gain to sides both of attempts and dispute, Romanian - writing the history of the region in order to legitimize to order in region the of history the writing

From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From from the texts of the participants of the debates will will debates the of participants the of texts the from empts of claiming rights. Finally, the result of the of result the Finally, rights. claiming of empts 30

n hs at te tep o dfnn this defining of attempt the part, this In eva .

„ ecie b Atnn Kzaoa See Kuzmanova. Antonina by described Les images de roumaine dans la littérature littérature la dans roumaine de images Les

, Sofia,1989 ,

tuation intended to affect to intended tuation rope and the decision of decision the and rope

h Romanian the the А 8

CEU eTD Collection debate used propagandistic tools in order to present the province as a significant part of their their of part significant a as province the present to order in tools propagandistic used debate p The side. Bulgarian and Romanian the from Dobruja over rights claiming of methods various in application its finds that propaganda of concept the is analyzed aspects of variety the justifies and together research this of chapters the binds that issue The Europe; in place and meaning its acquired “nation” world mere the how of way the describes reality” myth, programme, 1780: since nationalism and “Nations book his in Hobsbawm Eric “nation”,“nation and, following, be may debates borderland other for common characteristics its as well as novelty its that so countries, neighboring two between o unique, not but original, as Dobruja of case the Regarding explored. be should research current the build that concepts key the approaching before, However, region. Dobruja of Bulgar the of outcomes the and reasons the perceive to helps that element uniting a as grasped be to has framework theoretical the in place central the occupying Propaganda, explained. carefully be should them beyond ideas the and notions term the clarify to order In them. upon cast can study the of context the that nuances the cases many in and use their of possibilities of modernization and supporting identities, common or separate of formation projects, state and building is propaganda Hence,the peculiarity. religious and linguistic heritage, historical and cultural distinct its with state modern Chapter I. Chapter I. While While eern t al h cnet lse aoe oe hud er n id h multiple the mind in bear should one above, listed concepts the all to referring Theory, propaganda and integration: approaching approaching and integration: propaganda Theory,

establishing the control public over sphereand public actors. viewed as an instrument of promoting Bulgarian and Romanian nation Romanian and Bulgarianpromoting of instrument an asviewed ne has to adapt the terminology to this particular territorial dispute dispute territorial particular this to terminology the adapt to has ne -

building”and “state highlighted. One of the first concepts to be examined is examined be to concepts first the of One highlighted. 1. inology employed in other in employed inology

Dobruja. Concepts and terminology.

ian - projects”.

- Romanian debate over the appurtenance the over debate Romanian - issue of propaganda, other important important other propaganda, of issue

chapters of th of chapters riiat o the of articipants

e thesis, all the all thesis, e

the processes the territorial territorial

that of of that the the 9 -

CEU eTD Collection fis body. its of parts important as language and sharedorigins the with connection strong its of realization the as con the in “nation” the existed there Neither world. European Medieval the in sense modern its in language national education. mass of availability the without such as emerged have not could that languages, the 19 ethno its by defined nation any be cannot there that asserts historian 1850 Bulgaria, Thought in see details Further For missionaries. American through and 1830 th emigrants Polish the through also but Constantinople, in schools 40 Oncycle. the 39 38 37 36 35 192 34 33 32 secondin its half. the of middle the in Romania to applied be can Kohn by used shock Romanian the Bulgarian of development the in revolution French the of ideas the of impact the 18 the of end the in pattern similar a construct not ranks”. national the in purpose and spirit Fr in “only that out points revolution. French the by awakened nationalism the of out came that which before. hadexisted neither

Ibid, HansKohn, further For deta Carmichael, Cathie StephenBarbour, Ernst Hobsbawn, Ernest Renan, Renan, Ernest C. E. Black mentions that the ideas of French revolution were spreading in Bulgaria not only through the French French the through only not Bulgaria in spreading were revolution French of ideas the that mentions Black E. C. details further For

th p. 18 p. Gellner, Gellner, Hans Kohn precisely develops the idea of “national states” being a 19 a being states” “national of idea the develops precisely Kohn Hans

century. 40

impact of the French Revolution French the of impact Nations and nationalism since 1780 nationalismsince and Nations 34 Prelude to Nation to Prelude political thought. The notion of “national state” emerging out of the revolutionary the of out emerging state” “national of notion The thought. political 35 Nations and nationalism and Nations “What is a nation?” in nation?” a is “What ils see ils

32 This new notion has later given an impulse to the idea of the “n the of idea the to impulse an given later has notion new This ,

see Gellner explains this aspect, reflecting on the process of the making of modern making of ofthe aspect, this theprocess Gellnerexplains reflecting on temporary meaning of this world. The “nation” as such was a novelty, as well as novelty, a was such as “nation” The world. this of meaning temporary Hobsba

Alexandru Zub, Alexandru - 1885 in 1885 ance did the Revolution produce, for a short time at least, a unity of of unity a least, at time short a for produce, Revolution the did ance wn, op. cit, p cit, wn, op. - states. The French and German experience, 1789 experience, German and French The states.

The American Historical Review Historical American The

36 Modern political doctrines political Modern Lan 33 , Oxford, 1983, p 1983, Oxford, ,

La sfarsit de ciclu. Despre impactul Revolutiei franceze Revolutiei impactul Despre ciclu. de sfarsit La

guage and nationalism in Europe nationalismin and guage Hence, one can hardly affirm that there existed the standardthe existed there that affirm hardly can one Hence, p , Iasi, 1994, p.23. 1994, Iasi, , . . 101 , 38 Cambridge, 1992, p 1992, Cambridge, - 130

Apparently, the Romanian and Bulgarian cases did cases Bulgarian and Romanian the Apparently,

p .

47 th

- 50 easily can one nevertheless, century;

edited by Alfred Zimmern, Oxford, 1939, p. 190 p. 1939, Oxford, Zimmern, Alfred by edited

C. E. Black, Black, E. C.

the wide spread of literacy, printing and and printing literacy, of spread wide the at had come to Bulgaria after the revolution of of revolution the after Bulgaria to come had at , Vol. 48, No. 3 (Apr., 1943), 1943), No.3 (Apr., 48, Vol. , p . 15 . - 18. , New York, 2002, p New2002, , York,

The Influence of Western Political Political Western of Influence The

- 19 1715 - linguistic criterion before before criterion linguistic th 37

century and to Bulgaria to and century , Princeton, 1967, p , 1967, Princeton,

h ato, however, author, The th

century product product century p p.508. / . . 15 At the en the At toa state” ational - 17

p d of the the of d 39 . 2

trace trace

- and 4 10

CEU eTD Collection descent, a single language and a shared religion, a cultural tr cultural a religion, shared a and language single descent,a “common by characterized “individuality” an as it envisioned who revival, Bulgarian the of soul. Bulgarian the of renewal 19 the of half second the in only sphere public Bulgarian the into introduced was sense linguistic history Zograf 18 the 46 81 p. New2006, York, 45 B Mitev, 44 43 Balkans 42 41 “neam”employed inRomanian. and “norod” or Bulgarian in used “narod” like “nation” of synonyms the from differentmeaning, th revolution French the to back refers “citizens” as country a of inhabitants of concept the with together sense juridical its in “nation” a of idea in1796. Florianpublished Claris writer French de translation novelby the ofthehistorical Drace development”. national Greek from separated largely became institutions Romanian the “when B before state national independent its established Romania Ottomans, the from autonomy of degree larger of life and customs,etc”.

erlin, 2010, p 2010, erlin, Ibid, Daskalov, Macdermott, M. Alex Drace Alex For further details about the status of Romania and Bulgaria before 1829 see Nedeljko Radosavljevic in Plamen Plamen in Radosavljevic Nedeljko see 1829 before Bulgaria and Romania of status the about details further For Димитър th

century during the “National Awakening”. Dimitar Mishev would describe this period period this describe would Mishev Dimitar Awakening”. “National the centuryduring

- Empires and peninsulas: Southeastern Europe between Karlowitz and the peace of Adrianople, 1699 Adrianople, of peace the and Karlowitz between Europe Southeastern peninsulas: and Empires p. 83 p. th , Budapest, 2004, p. p. 2004, 28. Budapest, , Francis refers to the first documented usage of the word “nation” in Ioan Cantacu Ioan in “nation” word the of usage documented first the to refers Francis The first Bulgarian national “awakeners” made their voices heard in the second half of of half second the in heard voices their made “awakeners” national Bulgarian first The The Romanian pattern demonstrated many similarities with the Bulgarian one. Enjoying aBulgarian Enjoying one. withthe manyThe similarities demonstrated Romanian pattern

century when Paisi Hilendarski’s “Slavonic Hilendarski’s Paisi when century

The making of a nation in t in anation of making The Мишев - Francis, Francis, p . 177 . ulgaria. 41 A history of Bulgaria, 1393 Bulgaria, of history A . Neverth . , - Началото 181

The making of modern Romanian culture. Literacy and the development of National identity National of development the and Literacy culture. Romanian modern of making The

However, the word “nation” was a neologism in Romanian before 1821 before Romanian in neologism a was “nation” word the However, 43 eless, the concept of the “nation”, revived and understood in its ethno its in understood and revived “nation”, the of concept the eless,

на

българската

The definition of the Bulgarian “nation” was framed by the men the by framed was “nation” Bulgarian the of definition The

he Balkans he - 1885 , Budapest, 2004, p. p. 14 2004, Budapest, ,

, London, 1962, pp. 88 pp. London, 1962, , пробуда at had conferred these two concepts their new new their concepts two these conferred had at

utd n Daskalov, in quoted - Bulgarian history” appeared together with together appeared history” Bulgarian adition, common material conditionsmaterial common adition,

- 95 95

h mkn o a ain n the in nation a of making The 46 zino’s zino’s as the the as -

1829 This 11 45 - , ,

CEU eTD Collection equality, and a cosmopolitan outlook” expressing itself in revolutions and counterrevolutions counterrevolutions and revolutions in itself expressing outlook” cosmopolitan a and equality, of modernity the of or foundation Switzerland the Holland, Scandinavia, like tradition” and modernity fuse successfully that stability great of regimes “the of establishment the nationalism: of manifestations the of patterns fundamental K that noted be should it However, well. as states” “national and “nation” of concepts Romanian and Bulgarian of formation the of process the influenced significantly states. national their establishing in oth many countries for model guiding the became revolution French the that out points Kohn Hans 51 50 49 48 47 However, one. Bulgarian the and Romanian the particularly nations, the forming in role major the the of issue central the being propaganda, that argues that research current 1913 in used concepts the measurement”. of function a as but itself is it as not revealed “is effect, Heisenberg to referring it puts Todorova Maria as object, observed the since analogues Western an nationalisms Bulgarian and Romanian patterns, exploring in used extent some to be can Europe Western to Kohn by applied approaches the hence, exception; no beginningcentury. ofthe 20h the by world the over all spread state” “national a in manifested be should that “nation” a of nation. German the of uniqueness the underlining thinkers patriotic by paved way German the and France, like

Hobsbawn, Todorova, Maria Kohn, Ibidem Kohn, - 1940. Hobsbawm’s supposition that all the nations are invented are nations the all that supposition Hobsbawm’s 19 the from developing paradigm European Southeast The The age of nationalism. The first era of global history global firstof The era nationalism. of age The Nation to Prelude

Nations and nationalism since 1780:programme, myth, reality myth, 1780:programme, nationalismsince and Nations 48 Imagining the Balkans Imagining

th In his book his In e

the research are to be adjusted to the to adjusted be to are research the Bulgarian and Romanian cases. Being significantly different from Western from different significantly Being cases. Romanian and Bulgarian - states. The French and German experience, 1789 experience, German and French The states. 49

“The age of nationalism” Kohn underlines that the European idea European the that underlines Kohn nationalism” of age “The

, Oxford, 1997, p. p. 1997, 10. Oxford, , 47

, New York, 1962, p New1962, , York, d national states can be compared to their their to compared be can states national d s t a mnind bv, i model his above, mentioned was it As

a ain ae uo idvda liberty, individual upon based nation “a realities of Romania and Bulgaria in Bulgaria and Romania of realities , Cambridg , - 1715 51 th

is used only partially in the in partially only used is , Pri , p century . 75 . nceton,1967 50 e, 1992, p. 76 1992, e, - 80

Hence, in many cases many in Hence,

into the 20 the into h dsen three discerns ohn i, i hv a have did sis,

makes 12 er er

CEU eTD Collection “A Bosnian or a Herzegovinian Turk is a Turk by law, but as far as language and kinship are concerned, whatever concerned, are kinship and language as far as but law, by Turk a is Turk Herzegovinian a or Bosnian “A idea whilereferring tothe Bosnian Muslims: be cannot but retold, and propag by reconstructed created exclusively be easily can background historical common of ideas vague even and faith shared as well as unity Linguistic invented. purely be hardly can that group in themselves unite to wish people’s of result n viewed are nations the 1997: 2/3, 55 54 Nationalism 53 Central in Identity 52 t hard is It powers. foreign the of any by imposed not were states the of homogenization ideological of self “purely a with 1878” Russ France, Britain, by created Bulgarianand nations states national should one interests”. common their advancing and “defending people of groups as nations of idea Cohen’s Abner expanding the in methods propagandistic the grasped aspectas of an invention, is of an outcomes thatnations are the Hobsbawm’s assumption Bosnians, will remain Bosnians from,the came they where homeland their to return Turks real the when and land; the rule Turks the while Turks called are They world. the of the will were so grandfathers his

Abner Cohen, “Variable in ethnicity” in Charles Keyes, Keyes, Charles in ethnicity” in “Variable Cohen, Abner Bened see further For details Dositej Obradovic, “Letter to Haralampije”, in Balazs Trencsényi and Michael Kopec Michael and Trencsényi Balazs in Haralampije”, to “Letter Obradovic, Dositej Karpat, Kemal, “The Balkan national states and nat and states national Balkan “The Kemal, Karpat, o deny the impact of the Great the of impact the deny o Although Kemal Karpat asserts that “the national territorial states of the Balkans were were Balkans the of states territorial national “the that asserts Karpat Kemal Although Anderso

p.329 , London, 1991 , firstly clarify the circumstances and circumstances the clarify firstly

’ well n’s and Southeast Europe: Texts and Texts and Southeast Europe: and 54

Hence, i Hence,

- nw ise f ain a iaie communities imagined as nations of issue known - t ny as only ot ict Anderson, Anderson, ict serving purpose”, serving

last of his descendants be: Bosnians and Herzegovinians, until God decrees the end end the decrees God until Herzegovinians, and Bosnians be: descendants his of last

andistic forces. Writer and monk Dositej Obradovic explains this explains Obradovic Dositej monk and Writer forces. andistic n order to fully perceive the reasons and outcomes of the debate the of outcomes and reasons the perceive fully to order n ia and Austria throu Austria and ia

current research that views the nations as “interest clubs”, clubs”, “interest as nations the views that research current

h pouto o te ulc pee bt lo s natural a as also but sphere, public the of production the Powers in the process of the formation of the national states national the of formation the of process the in Powers in particular Imagined Communities: Reﬂections on the Origins and Spread of Spread and Origins the on Reﬂections Communities: Imagined 55 Commentaries

ionalism: image and reality” in reality” and image ionalism: the identities of the population as well as the plansthe as well as population the of identities the

Ethnic change Ethnic

grounds of the formation of the of formation the of grounds . and will be like their ancestors were”. ancestors willlike their be and

s according to some common characteristics common some to according s gh the mechanism of the Berlin T Berlin the of mechanism the gh , Budapest, 2006, Vol. 1, p. p. 128 Vol. 1, 2006, Budapest, , , Washington, 1981, p Washington,1981, , Islamic studies Islamic ek , 53 Discourses of Collective Collective of Discourses

ht neat with interacts that p . . 306 52

Romania - 310 , vol. 36, No. 36, vol. ,

reaty of of reaty n and n

CEU eTD Collection be plante to soil prepared ago long and well very a also but mechanisms, propagandistic only not requires nation the of formation any since together peoples the bind naturally would that basis common nation Bulgarian nor Romanian, interests”. common their advancing and “defending people of groups presenting “nations” of notion Cohen’s Abner with corresponds thesis current the for adopted particular, m was it As states. Balkan the of cases the of any in unacceptable absolutely is affirmation Karpat’s nevertheless, Balkans, the in introduction. 60 59 For state. the of borders the 58 within up flaring gradually n Romanian manifestationsthe on furtherdetails national numerous the with cope to had 57 56 Serbian formed”. was state a which around elements lived they which in empires great the to opposition in languages, self became peoples Balkan “As nationalism: Balkan the of roots the describing when claim this confirms Stokes Gale Berlin. of congress tim the by shaped been already had that “nation” the of formation of period long the West, the in Modernity to transitions as served that those to similar revival, national own 19 and states European principalities, th on developing unification to leading tendencies political general I Powers.

Daskalov th see further For details, p Washington,1981, ethnicity”, in “Variable Cohen, For instance, the artificial “creation” of the Romanian nation was hardly profitable for the Austrian Empire t Empire Austrian the for profitable hardly was nation Romanian the of “creation” artificial the instance, For Gale Stokes, Stokes, Gale th

century. The Bulgarian na Bulgarian The ex created not was state national independent Romanian The

peasant revolt of revolt peasant d into. d into. t was the product of the application of Western ideas of “nation” and “citizenship”, the the “citizenship”, and “nation” of ideas Western of application the of product the was t , The making of a of making The

58 57

ainls i te Bal the in Nationalism

the manifestations and wishes of the local elites, local the of wishes and manifestations the

the outcomes of the national revival appearing from the beginning of the the of beginning the from appearing revival national the of outcomes the e significant workof significant e

nation in the Balkans the in nation tional state, officially established later than the Romanian one, had its its had one, Romanian the than later established officially state, tional

1804 “was supported by numbers of educated Romanians, Greeks and and Greeks Romanians, educated of numbers by supported “was 1804 ational awakening see awakening ational

as A Anttd Bibliography Annotated An kans. entioned previously, t previously, entioned can be “purely invented” without any originally existing existing originally any without invented” “purely be can Dan ,

Budapest, 2004, p. p. 40 2004, Budapest,

Berindei, Berindei, p .306 Keith 60

- conscious, they developed their cultures and and cultures their developed they conscious, iial, oi Oe pit ot ht vn a even that out points Okey Robin Similarly, -

310 Hitchins Construirea Romaniei moderne Romaniei Construirea

he ,

The Romanians, 1774 Romanians, The concept of nation, in general and in and general in nation, of concept

Nw ok 18, . Se lo t also See 8 p. 1984, York, New ,

willing to enter t enter to willing ertr fte Danubian the of territory e thus creating the unifying unifying the creating thus lsvl b te Great the by clusively - 1866 , Bucuresti, 2009 Bucuresti, , 56 he world of the of world he

Hence, neither neither Hence, , Oxford, 1996 Oxford, , o the of e 59

and hat hat 14 he he

CEU eTD Collection but relating to the ideas of the French revolution. French the of ideas the to relating but Greeks the regarding “nation” and “citizens” as notions such of aware perfectly was leader the the Balkan the states, to compared later “nation” and state” “national a of idea the grasped had that side the remained misrule”. Muslim against Christians Balkan of determination peasant revo alocalized lent Habsburg who Serbs, 64 63 and Birtek “ 62 61 anti markedly a developed specificity national of “discourse Romanian the elites” the of deals political piecemeal of modern basis the on the state Romanian of formation the and 1848 of movements revolutionary the of failure the “With nation of area the in dispute Dobrujan the of place the clarify simultaneous”. of origins the that is Europe, Southeastern of case the by suggested paradox, this for explanation possible “one that writes author the Europe; Southeastern in nationalism to push a gavealso but coexisted, only not highl Stokes that. than original and complicated more as much was process whole the but strategies, and notions borrowing actively patterns, Western the concepts new nation such their oriented definitely Bulgarians the and Romanians the Greeks, introducing proclamation, the “liberty”and “nation” new of (”Roman”), ideas “Rum”“Hellenes”(Greeks) of instead translating when language Do not think of the Greeks as agricultu as Greeks the of not think Do

Gale Stokes, Gale Ibidem Robin For further details on the influence of the Greek revolution on the Ottoman politic Ottoman the on revolution Greek the of influence the on details further For

From the proclamation of the Greek revolt by Alexandros Yipsilanti it becomes clear that that clearbecomes it Yipsilanti Alexandros by revolt Greek the of proclamation the From The identity discourses in Bulgaria and Romania explain further the concepts that can can that concepts the further explain Romania and Bulgaria in discourses identity The Okey

Thalia Thalia ,

Nationalism in the Bal the in Nationalism Eastern Europe, 1 Europe, Eastern 64 Dragonas

most striking example of which is not Romania striking isnot and exampleofwhich Bulgaria,most butGreece. ed. ed. aiaim n ntoaim ee itnt atog mr o less or more although distinct, were nationalism and capitalism Citizenship and the na the and Citizenship 740

- kans 1985 feudalism to communism to feudalism 1985 ral laborers! Ottoman responses to the Greek war ofIndependence war Greek the to responses Ottoman laborers! ral , New York, 1984, p. New , 1984, York, tion - state in Greece and Turkey and stateGreece in - lt something of the allure of a struggle for self for a struggle of allure somethinglt the of 62 liberal ton liberal

The Ottomans, however, had to adapt their adapt to had however, Ottomans, The 9

gt tedvlpeto aiaim that capitalism of development the ights , London, 2003, p. p. 61 London, 2003, , e as early as the last quarter of the the of quarter last the as early as e - building and nationalism and building 61

paety te Ottomans the Apparently, al language see language al , London, 2005, p London, 2005, , -

building programs on on programs building Hakan . 63 p . 78 .

theories. ” in ” Like the

- Erdem, Erdem, 83

Faruk Faruk

- ,

CEU eTD Collection views on the Romanian society Romanian the on views Party National Alecsandri Vasile and Kogalniceanu Mihail as people such that notes historiography, Romanian the of development the in Xenopol theydiscourse,re but apparently, were century”. nineteenth 71 70 69 1967 Bucuresti, 68 12 67 modern Romaniei Construirea 66 in 65 language, Romanian nation itself. the and, hence, “westerni and “modernizing” place takes script mixed the through Latin 19 the in that notice also should One only (not academy) Mihaileana the of founder the and language Romanian the of Eminescu), of ideal” “stylistic (the Balcescu the of adoption the of and writing of necessity principle phonetical the promoted who 1828, of grammar Romanian famous 50 the of flare debate, political a to factor linguistic the introduce Romanian nationhistorical through its legacy and of actuality the find to trying and continuing essays Balazs See D. further For details For further details see details further For - Paul Sorin n re t prev te hrce o Vsl Alecsandi’ Vasile of character the perceive to order In 64 Murarasu,

Gheorghe Gabriel Gheorghe

Hiemstra

Mitu Hiemstra in his book dedicated o the bookdedicatedo his in Hiemstra The idea of the association of the language with the nation and therefore the attempts to to attempts the therefore and nation the with language the of association the of idea The Trencsenyi

th the eminent politician, but also the founder of the journal “Dacia literara”) and others. others. and literara”) “Dacia journal the of founder the also but politician, eminent the . ,

Re This matter continued matter This

Naţionalismul lui Eminescu lui Naţionalismul , -

searching the natio the searching “ n odva srnl afce Xenopol affected strongly Moldavia” in Alexandru D. Xenopol and the development of Romanian Historiography Romanian of development the and Xenopol D. Alexandru , ,

“ see Political Romanticism and National Characterology in modern Romanian intellectual history intellectual Romanian modern in Characterology National and Romanticism Political

65 Carabus

George Calinescu, George Alexand

h ies f h “eeain f 88 wr sil nlecn te later the influencing still were 1848” of “generation the of ideas The e , Bucuresti, 2009, p p 396 2009, Bucuresti, , ,

ru "Asachi "Asachi

Xenopol n: the Romanian file Romanian n:the

and nation and

- the disputes began by Heliade by began disputes the the use of foreign words in order to express new notions) new express to order in words foreign of use the

198 p. 1999, Bucuresti, , 66 Istoria literaturii române. Compendiu române. literaturii Istoria un separatist avant la lettre" la avant separatist un ,

- th and especially their ideas expressed in “The wishes of the of wishes “The in expressed ideas their especially and digested and acquired and forms.digested slightly nostalgic Natiunea romana Natiunea

etr a eouinr sic fo te yii t the to Cyrilic the from switch revolutionary a century .

70 67 role of role

- Asachi ( like Heliade like ( Asachi 406 Their influence later resulted in the in resulted later influence Their , Cluj, 2008 Cluj, ,

language significant its played role. pltcl activ political s the eminentfin the the , Bucuresti, 1999 and and 1999 Bucuresti, , d up with distinct power in the beginning the powerin distinct with up d

past debates where the where debates past Tee issues These . , p p ,

. 129 . in

Codrul Cosminului Codrul ities one may refer to to refer may one ities - 130 - - de Radulescu (the author of the the of author (the Radulescu - , Bucure , Radulescu, the propagandist the Radulescu,

- siècle historian siècle 71 on rfeto i his in reflection found Scrieri sociale si filosofice si sociale Scrieri , ș Mihail Mihail ig te Romanian the zing” ti, 1983 ti, ” , Nr.10, 2004 Nr.10, , , London, 1987, p 1987, London, , de

finition of the the of finition Kogalniceanu

collection of collection Dan 68

Alexandru Alexandru

Berindei, Berindei,

16 69 p ” , , .

CEU eTD Collection find the origins of the nation in the works of Dimitrie Cantemir or even in the brancovenesc brancovenesc the in even or Cantemir Dimitrie of works the in nation the of origins the find “autochtonists”. convinced most the and reformers fervent most the for both essential was which past, the with poi practical the from words the of writing and spelling the regulates and commodity more brings Bucuresti 76 75 iden multiple 74 Philosophical 73 p to According 72 unregu numerous his alphabet; Latin the of frames the into put to tried he which language, Church old the to attached remained Asachi hand, one nation. the of spirit the Moldavian tha language, dialect for athetongue ofRomanian sample thewhole as which perceived was turn inits through means and byoflanguage. the grasp was such as nation Bulgarian) the is well (as Romanian the Hence, terminology”. own our in concepts these translate to able be to order in arrangements, their st be epoch”. an language understanding of thewritten of the on based is past the concerning explanation credible “any that out points Neumann Victor in nation the of idea Herderian the when century19h the of half first the until not was it However, Greceanu. Radu of chronicle p

Ibidem .337 erzi a epesd i proa hr eprec we daig with dealing when experience hard personal his expressed has Negruzzi Johann itr Neumann Victor Garbaret udied – 343 O 1860 in occurs change The Gheorghe Asachi draws attention to the Moldavian chronicles, proposing the use of the the of use the proposing chronicles, Moldavian the to attention draws Asachi Gheorghe

- Chisinau, p Chisinau, ne can trace the roots of the Romanian nationalistic disc ne the trace can Romanian therootsnationalistic of

Gottfried tities Ibraileanu as soon as “we have reconstructed the language used by its people in conceptualizing in people its by used language the reconstructed have “we as soon as

Costache Neguzzi Costache Writings nt of view. H view. of nt , Bucharest, 2004, p. p. 63 2004, Bucharest, , 72 ,

ocpuly ytfe: East mystified: Conceptually . 45 . , ,

ed. Herder

Spiri -

57 Michael 76

u cii i clua oaesa Aetc e cu de Amestec romaneasca, cultura in critic tul

Supporting Westernization of all spheres of the Romanian life on the on life Romanian the of spheres all of Westernization Supporting owever, this rapid change also change rapid this owever, , ,

"Cum am învăţat româneşte învăţat am "Cum Treatise

N. eaal fo is agae n clua hrtg emerged. heritage cultural and language its from separable

Forster, - 82 aotn te agae o h nw icmtne. It circumstances. new the to language the adopting 1862,

the

Cambridge, - Central Europe torn between ethnicism and recognition of of recognition and ethnicism between torn Europe Central

Origin " 74 , first published in published first ,

of Later he adds that any historicalLater period any adds he that

ae eprmns ih h Ltn script, Latin the with experiments lated 2002,

Language breaks

p.65

ourse, theattempts lookingto in a sort of historical continuation historical of sort a

this rapid change of the script. See See script. the of change rapid this ,

in Curier de Ambe de Curier et cnrdcoi: . Asachi G. contradictorii: rente

Johann

d hog history, through ed Gottfried le t had to reflect t hadtoreflect

Sexe

von , I, nr. 22, nr. I, ,

Herder: purely purely can 17 75 73 ,

CEU eTD Collection peculiarityattempts toseek andglorious origin the for the through it. 20 the Buk nation the of origins it the through discover to attempts and Italian) modern of basis the on it reform “pu the for passion later Latin neologisms, with infatuation his with Asachi that clear becomes it Ibraileanu Garbaret Kogalniceanu. Mihail of side the from criticism firm found however, romanesc” way tolerant some for hoping and ideas opposite nation the forms that empha (the Cipariu and Laurian of those 82 p 174 2009, Budapest, 19 the 81 „Antisemitul” Mur in developed well regarding ideas xenophobic clearly express 80 Southeastern in peculiarity 1838 Liberalism, Romanian Translylvanian Fo modernity. 79 78 77 experi proposing only not productive, extremely also were they liberal the oneintheterms of moderate or conservative cases many in seeming that continuity” institutional than rather ethnic, to appeals on based characterology conservative the was 1913, by witnessed be could which result, The debates. in

Ibidem Ibidem

Balazs Trencsenyi, Balazs The The Timotei Cipariu, one of the most fervent reformers of the language presented his ideas as the liberal project of project liberal the as ideas his presented language the of reformers fervent most the of one Cipariu, Timotei Alexandru Xenopol although his opinion about the language reforms can be viewed to some extent similar to to similar extent some to viewed be can reforms language the about opinion his although Xenopol Alexandru order to clarify the ideas of nation and origin that are used by the participants of the Dobrujan the of participants the by used are that origin and nation of ideas the clarify to order ovinan Aron Pumnul and than Maxim, Cipariu and Laurian). and Cipariu Maxim, than and Pumnul Aron ovinan grew out of the gradual “radicalization” of the Romanian liberalism. The political element element political The liberalism. Romanian the of “radicalization” gradual the of out grew th neo

th Ref should One century”,

- in “ in century the Romanian ideas of the nation were balancing between the linguistic linguistic the between balancing were nation the of ideas Romanian the century romantic poet Mihai Eminescu Eminescu Mihai poet romantic tnu bcm te predecessor the became tongue s erring to the Romanian nationalistic Romanian the erringto , p Natiunea romana” Natiunea r details see see details r p . 183 .

n M in

), firmly criticizes their radical projects, attempting to find a sort of a balance between the the between balance a of sort a find to attempting projects, radical their criticizes firmly ), “History and character. Visions of national peculiarity in the Romanian Political discourse of of discourse Political Romanian the in peculiarity national of Visions character. and “History

- ăraşu, rificatio notice that notice 202 ishkova Diana Diana ishkova

Europe

Naţionalismul lui Eminescu lui Naţionalismul Kinga n” of the language ( language the of n” , Bucuresti, 1999, p 1999, Bucuresti, , , Budapest, 2009, 81 p 2009, Budapest, ,

ethno

- was the notable radicalism notable the was Koretta Koretta e te epe Pltc o ntoa pec national of Politics people. the We, sis on the Latin origin and structure of the Romanian language Romanian the of structure and origin Latin the on sis -

linguistic debates linguistic can be regarded in some aspects some in regarded be can the - Sata Sata 1848”

purity of the Romanian language and nation and language Romanian the of purity out of the situa the of out “The people incorporated. Constructions of the nation in in nation the of Constructions incorporated. people “The

in . . 214 of the Transylvanian school of purists (first the the (first purists of school Transylvanian the of discourses of the 19 the of discourses sudden support for Heliade for support sudden , Bucureşti, 1995, See 1995, Bucureşti, ,

Diana - 219

a, oee, uh oe oeat hn the than tolerant more much however, was,

82 Mishkova tion. See Alexandru Xenopol, Xenopol, Alexandru See tion.

79 80

of the Romanian “li Romanian the of

ments, but also putting them into them putting also but ments, e te epe Pltc o national of Politics people. the We,

“strengthening as an extreme nationalist who tried to tried who nationalist extreme an as 78 Chapter 5 and 6, „Xenofobul” and and „Xenofobul” 6, and 5 Chapter th

laiy n otesen Europe Southeastern in uliarity Hence, by the beginning of beginning the by Hence, century one may notice that centurymaythat notice one 77 -

Radulescu’s ideas to to ideas Radulescu’s rm h esy of essays the From . This idea is extremely extremely is idea This . of the patterns of of patterns the of “Unitatea sufletului sufletului “Unitatea beral” thinkers beral”

and culture culture and 18 81 ,

CEU eTD Collection featured arguments also from similar side. the Bulgarian dispute territorial Dobrujan the of propaganda ideas These entity”. organic an as nation the explain to offered which Darwinism) social (e.g. paradigms new of emergence the with Europe, in discourses identity the of configuration are witnessed wit accordance the in developed paths. their of originality the but research, these exceptionalityof the Not practice. не радост за ни роди тази,дето езикна в стонове езикнамъки, 86 85 “In (ed), 84 p. 29 2012, 83 20 the of beginning the in role important more a play to begin descent common and blood the sufferings, the of ancestors, my of language sacred had factor linguistic The descent”. “common and “blood” “language”, the of idea right” bycultural thepresence over heritage. landproved the of “natural of argument powerful the into transformed was issue cultural this dispute Dobrujan cultu a but idea, social a just not is which nation, existing the describe to order in adapted and reformed being language) common heritage, architectural folklore, (as subjects appe Dechev happens”. generally it as given and taken be cannot they that and products constructed historically the are symbols national

Език свещен на моите деди, намоите Езиксвещен Ibidem Стефан Trencsenyi, almost the same role both in Bulgaria and in Romania; as Hristo Botev would put it: it: put would Botev Hristo as Romania; in and Bulgaria in both role same the almost This concept was strengthened by the developing from the times of the Bulgar the of times the from developing the by strengthened conceptwas This o basis the Researching search of the Essentially Bulgarian: Networks of National intimacy 19 intimacy National Networks of Bulgarian: Essentially the of search

Дечев

— The politics of “National character”. A study in Eu East interwar study A character”. “National of politics The

of organic nation with cultural heritage as its basis were widely applied in the the in applied widely were basis its as heritage cultural with nation organic of l nt o iaiay ybl” sd o nt te omnt, u t ata real actual to but community, the unite to used symbols” “imaginary to not als за ядове отровни ядове отровни за , « В

търсене ековни,

на

българското –

from 84 f the Bulgarian nation, Stefan Dechev underlines that “the “the that underlines Dechev Stefan nation, Bulgarian the f

te eea Wsen rns“h ed f h 19 the of end trends:“The Western general the h

Hristo t hud e ihihe ta wie eiig h Bulgarian, the defining while that highlighted be should It : ethno

Botev мрежи

However, the Romanian ideas of the nation still still nation the of ideas Romanian the However, ’ - s linguistic debates makes them worthy of thorough thorough of worthy them makes debates linguistic

на poem

tgte wt te ethno the with (together

национална

“ The

Bulgarian on o cnuis etc”. centuries of moans

интимност

th language ropean political thought political ropean -

21 st

century”,

19 ” -

21 - igitc ones) linguistic век , regarded earlier, regarded ,

Sofia, 2010, p. 13 Sofia,2010, »/ ral one. ral Stefan 86 ian Revival Revival ian

, th However,

Dechev Dechev London,

85 century

In the In

“The that that

19 83 th

CEU eTD Collection identified withthat ofhumankind, andthe for demand Bulgarian autonomyis made inthe name of Cyril and Methodius. memories of theold immemorial”, nat all among differences cultural century.Bulgarian romantic While ofthe19 nationalism 91 90 123 p 2012, 89 88 87 famil names their make historians unknown hitherto but talented for allowed which competitions announced “regularly that societies learned Hungarian founded identity these way the describes given characteristics natural already of basis the on generated construct, propagandistic a as study this in regarded the Romanian one. ofthethe context Dobrujan dispute thatsymbolically tocompete putthe Bulgarian with nation Hence, tendency ofreviving and the affirming thenation became it extremely important alsoin foreign overcoming influences and by therift between the the Bulgarians take work should arevival by uptheRevivaltoward new again the repudiating or Balkana became“In wars “possibility toreturn healthy ofresurection”: order tothe condition “presented symboliccoveted acapital” source of yetnot civilized of civilizational pr

Ibidem, Daskalov, Ibidem Detchev Trencsenyi InBulgaria, Ugro theidea of As it becomes it As , p. 33 p. ,

, p. 229 p. “Who are our ancestors? “Race”, science, and politics in Bulgaria 1879 politics Bulgaria in and science, “Race”, ancestors? our are “Who

The making The , The politics of “National character”. A study in interwar in study A character”. “National of politics The

later it turned to the issue of descent andancestry.later tothe issue ofdescent itturned changed and ogress”.

of a nation in the Balkans. Historiography of the Bulga of the Historiography Balkans. the in anation of Slavic MedievalSlavic pasta

and attempting to fill the unclear gaps in any arguable case. M case. arguable any in gaps unclear the fill to attempting and clear from the previous considerations, the considerations, previous the from clear 88

I 89 n themiddle ofthe 19

However, after the theidea liberation Bulgarian ofthe nation being

the accent ontheenlightened put revival. was Bulgarian

- raig pr creating os n sw h “ain a hvn eitd ic ti since existed having as “nation” the saw and ions - Finnic origin of Asparukh was coming Finnicwas the Asparukh with origin inconflict of nd discussions about the Greek orBulgarian about the Greek origins nd discussions pgna ucind hn depict when functioned opaganda th 90

centuryBulgarians“the cause is ofthe

the Bulgarian theend Revival by th

century the “linguistic emphasized and intelligentsia and the people”.intelligentsia and East European political thought political European East iar to the public” by engaging in engagingby public” the to iar

rian revival rian proc - 1912 ess of nation of ess ”, Berlin, 2010, p. p. 27 2010, ”,Berlin, , Budapest, 2004, p. p. 228 2004, , Budapest, n te newly the ing of the - onika Baar onika building As it 91 ,

London,

20 es es is -

CEU eTD Collection justifies the state in the present”. the in state the justifies exi the past, the to links establishing by history national of expression the or reduceda singleelement. to “identification” as defined better be “categorization”. can which concept”, “omnipresent an become history. national the writing of process the p. 4 2002, 96 95 Nationalism” 94 2000. 93 studies case Hungarian and Romanian identities: 92 the of integration the Romania. in about Dobruja Northern work his in Iordachi Constantin by employed concept Tilly’s t by distinguished actors of “set as citizens of definition the thesis, this In sphere”. “public in meddling actors” “public by used tool a as viewed is propaganda economical and Political explored. is debate the of side curre the in but people, different by and levels different on such a confrontation. Romanian for humaninorderall possible interests wouldwinthe tocreateabattle thenation. The story that nation these between of “fortress” the when changed be can that flag a past, the with individual an binds that banner a is it building: nation in role same Roger see details further For Gabriella Elgenius, Gabriella Iordachi, oia Ba Monika Anthony Smith, Smith, Anthony

Just as “national flags constitute short cuts to nation building being intimately linked to linked intimately being building nation to cuts short constitute flags “national as Just The Bulgarian and Romanian attempts of claiming rights over Dobruja were undertaken undertaken were Dobruja over rights claiming of attempts Romanian and Bulgarian The

Citizenship, Nation and State and Nation Citizenship, - ugra dsue vr orj i 1913 in Dobruja over dispute Bulgarian ,Edinburgh, 1995, p. p. 182 1995, ,Edinburgh, ar, ar, “ h itleta hrzn o lbrl ainls i Hungary” in nationalism liberal of horizons intellectual The 93 Symbols of nations and nationalism. Celebrating nationhood Celebrating and nationalism. nations of Symbols

At the same time a nati asame time the At Cvc n ehi nationalism” ethnic and “Civic

- building projects and the identities is built by propaganda that appeals to appeals that propaganda by built is identities the and projects building heir position vis position heir s

94 Brubaker and Frederick Cooper, Cooper, Frederick and Brubaker

The “public sphere”, hence, becomes “a becomes hence, sphere”, “public The 95 - Building: The Integration of Northern Dobrogea into Romania, Romania, into Dobrogea Northern of Integration The Building:

Identity is regarded in this work as an aspect that plays the plays that aspect an as work this in regarded is Identity h nto i surrender is nation the , Budapest, 2001, p. p. 22 2001, Budapest, , - a onal identity is always multi identity alwaysonal is - 92 vis some particular state” is borrowed from Charles Charles from borrowed is state” particular some vis

Identity as Brubaker and Cooper point it out, has out, it point Cooper and Brubaker as Identity

n . pne ad . Wollman, H. and Spencer P. in - 90 ersne oe f h eape of examples the of one represented 1940 “ eod identity”, Beyond d o nw oqeo. h linkage The conqueror. new a to ed

nt research only the propagandistic propagandistic the only research nt

in , Oxford, 2011, p. 2011, Oxford, ,

Nation - dimensional unable to beunable dimensional

Theo

virtual meeting space meeting virtual - stence of the nation the of stence Building and contested contested and Building y n Society and ry 187 “Nations and and “Nations

Pittsburg,

29 (1), (1), 29 21

CEU eTD Collection es media”. news conflict spheres”. public national within by from generated actors be to have will development sphere public European “any because dimension their to governmentcitizens andonlyathe citizens”. communication secondarily among wher 101 100 99 98 97 met similar displaying while credibility, of lack and techniques devious other’s the “denouncing that out pointing work, their in clearly very idea this explain Thornton Tim and Taithe Bertrand phenomenon. same counter the methods, propagandistic other ways possible ofjustifyingtheclaims aside. are left the to relating propaganda of forms form”. musical or pictorial written, spoken, broa representations These representations. may take of bythe manipulation action influencing human the in “Propaganda Lasswell: Harold by explanation precise a comes outof research this employed ofin thepropaganda definition The time. the same the process forming and“pub ofthe sharing in engaging individuals actors”, “public the by exploited propaganda, of target a as understood

Ruud Koopmans, Paul Statham, Statham, Paul Koopmans, Ruud HansSpeier, Sampimon Janette

Harold D. Lasswell, D. Harold Ibidem e opinions are formed are opinions e h “ulc pee satn o te ntoa lvl srths no h interna the into stretches level” “national the on starting sphere” “public The at audiences several at aims spheres, different in actors public by produced Propaganda, - s h suy is study the As , p. 15 p. , ridden yet open and peaceful interplay between state and ci and state between interplay peaceful and open yet ridden “

The rise of public opinion ofpublic rise The 100

ple t te netgto o te orj dsue te pbi shr” is sphere” “public the dispute, Dobruja the of investigation the to Applied Becoming Bulgarian Becoming “ Propaganda

os mks hs prdxcl n i sm wy a self a ways some in and paradoxical a this makes hods, closely closely ”.

The making of a European public sphere European public a of making The 97

”

These “public opinions” are seen as “a communication from the from communication “a as seen are opinions” “public These in Robert Jackall, Jackall, inRobert once t te oprsn f h Rmna ad Bulgarian and Romanian the of comparison the to connected ” in Robert Jackall, Jackall, Robert in” 253 , p. 2006, - legitimizing one’s rights over the territory are regarded. All regarded. are territory the over rights one’s legitimizing propa ganda is ganda lic opinions”. 101 99

Propaganda

hs pc i rgre a a ae ta “entails that area an as regarded is space This n hs eerh msl te pkn r written or spoken the mostly research, this In

Propaganda touched upon as upon touched

, London, 1995, p.13 London, 1995, , , London, 1995, p.27 , London, 1995, , Cambridge, 2010, p. 5 Cambridge, , 2010, dest sense is the technique of of technique the is sense dest the reflection of reflection the vil society covered by the the by covered society vil

- undermining undermining almost 98

tional tional the 22

CEU eTD Collection however, regarded as much more important, as both Romania and Bulgaria attempted to gain and gain and attemptedBulgaria to Romaniaand important, asboth however, more regardedas much types two its to but from the Romanian demograp p process”. See Kuzmanova. 105 104 103 Thornton 102 idea determines themes ofthe theconcepts the current and thesis used. arguments themsel between exchanging elites, local two between dispute a as seen is territory the claiming over rights of case Dobrujan the Therefore, debate. the of terms the in “distinguishness” their not refers case this in “elite” definition The th in participating inhabiting th depend not did 1940 in dispute the of outcomes the because analyze to or trace to hard extremely is reaction Their citizens. the a of role a played sphere public national allowthe not did that mechanismsupporting the however, another, to side one from drown abroad. from reactions and nationa fervent population’s local the on not relying Dobruja keep oaad epoe i ti research this in employed ropaganda

For further details, see the third chapter, where the wider and narrower types narrower of widerand where thechapter, thesee third further For details, Jowett,O’Donnell, G. V. The importance of the international public sphere and its dominance in the dispute is well analyzed by Antonina Antonina by analyzed well is dispute the in dominance its and sphere public international the of importance The Bertrand Taithe, Tim Thornton, Thornton, Tim Taithe, Bertrand The process of claiming rights over the territory resulted in a propagandistic campaign propagandistic a in resulted territory the over rights claiming of process The actively individuals elites”, “local the were propaganda executing actors” “public The

Propaganda 102 hic or historical data, inmany thatis unclearorhic or historical simply cases inexistent.

As “perceptions are shared and cognitions may be manipulated”, be may cognitions and shared are “perceptions As e provincebythe time.

Кузманова ves and ves e dispute by producing texts, producing by dispute e , 1999, 1 ,p. 1999,

and Bulgarian addressing and sidewas

–

Propaganda persuasion and Propaganda

h ntoa ad h itrainl one. international the and national the trying to influence the Great the influence to trying , От 105

The international public sphere could be influenced significantly, influenced be could sphere public international The Ньой “ Propa

almost до

ad: msoe o reoi ad persuasion? and rhetoric or misnomer a ganda:

Крайова

s n ay ae aaye idpnety rm h real the from independently analyzed cases many in is at all on the reactions of the propaganda auditory auditory propaganda the of reactions the on all at

Dobrujan issue to lose its significance in the eyes of significanceof eyes lose its the to in issue Dobrujan to their noble origin or higher social status, but to but status, social higher or origin noble their to / A.Kuzmanova, , London, 2006, p. 13 London, 2006, ,

elaborating strategies and expressing opinions. opinions. expressing and strategies elaborating

Powers, attracting them to one’s side. This side. one’s to them attracting Powers,

not simply to the public sphere in gene sphere in thepublic not simply to From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From 104

l spirit, but on the decisions decisions the on but spirit, l

audience are analyzed. are audience h itrainl pc is, space international The

”

103 In B. Taithe and T. T. and Taithe B. In , Sofia,1989

the concept of concept the

ral, ral, 23

CEU eTD Collection the Romani the section different modest one only make propaganda of methods and division building, territory nation of questions general on concentrating works significant as well as Bulgaria between dispute Dobrujan the of problem specific the regarding literature The Romania, 107 the and second 106 of confirmation the na and mechamisms propagandistic of analysis thorough his thesis, the of timeframes the into fits that period the before destiny its determining the Romanian a debatesconcerning theregion andits Dobru of th of rejection the from Dobru of perception 1913 of dispute in Dobruja Northern of beactivelyseveral will followingtexts ofthe used. propag two of clash the to and land the over rights the justifying of methods Romanian and Bulgarian of comparison the to paid is attention little very state, the into it integrating of policy Bulgarian investigate

The primary source primary The osatn Iordachi, Constantin anda plans regarding regarding plans anda

Although the historian the Although sources, useful most the of One represent some of the publications that proved to be extremely useful for the research of research the for useful extremely be to proved that publications the of some represent Pittsburg, ja into Romania. For the current thesis the most important part will be the analysis of analysis the be will part important most the thesis current the For Romania. into ja valua an the third chapter third - Bulgarian dispute concerning Dobru concerning dispute Bulgarian thesis current the for sources ble - pcfc Dobrujan specific 1940.

2002 s, texts of the participants of the debate, are not listed in the current section and appear in the the in appear and section current the in listed not are debate, the of participants the of texts s, ja by the Romanian side, showing and explaining how it gradually change gradually it how explaining and showing side, Romanian the by ja the

iiesi, ain n State and Nation Citizenship,

107 e land to its acceptance, and the and acceptance, its to land e s

, where they are thoroughly analyzed. thoroughly are they where ,

Romania arguments The author dedicated the biggest part of the work to the evolu the to work the of biggestpart the dedicated authorThe nation

focuses his attention on the processes happening in the region and and region the in happening processes the on attention his focuses

gives an extended perspecive on the prelude to the Dobrujan Dobrujan the to prelude the on perspecive extended an gives

ae n h trs f uoen ilmc ad Romanian and diplomacy European of terms the in case building projects in one in projects building rpsd n hs eerh His research. this in proposed Constantin Iordachi’s research regarding the integration integration the regarding research Iordachi’s Constantin 2. tion Literature review - ulig Te nerto o Norther of Integration The Building: Te wor The .

- building ja (1913 ja ppurt n policy of integrati of policy n

anance. s itd and listed ks

- strategies is strategies particular region. particular 1940)

. 106 ok rvds n extremely an provides book .

While most of the books the of most While part of the of part

extremely important extremely briefly viewed in this this in viewed briefly on of the Nothern part part Nothern the of on

For this purpose, this For Dboe into Dobrogea n

large body of of body large Romania and and Romania tion of theof tion

for for 24 d -

CEU eTD Collection Romanians and Bulgarians co Bulgarians and Romanians revisionism” Bulgarian and interests Romanian had framed Roma in happening processes of explanations the requires investigation the Romania in citizenship of making in trends global and local the of fusion that the of analysis the for material useful 110 109 108 and territory Bulgarian exclusively diplom alsoit thesocial aspects of rega that case Dobrujan the of explanations wider give to author and War World Second the of beginning the before significantis publication This si the of international politics outcome the explains finally and region the demonstrate perspective the “public sphere”, notonthe local one. t current the in explored focu major a as it viewing analysis. their and materials archival important very

А Ungureanu, George p. 5 cit., op. Iordachi,

ig oe n h itrainl ecin o h problem the to reaction international the on more sing Кузманова had tc is surroundin ties atic h work The Antonina Kuzmanova’s research Kuzmanova’s Antonina impor particularly is source The hpdis lat its shaped and influen , От

Ньой of a Romanian historian George Ungureanu “The question of Cadrilater: Cadrilater: of question “The Ungureanu George historian Romanian a of

Chestiunea Cadrilaterului: interese romanesti si revizionism bulgar si revizionism romanesti interese Cadrilaterului: Chestiunea

–

er develompent. er the division of Dobru of division the

ced thepropagandaced in1913 до ilmtc su o te “Great the of issue diplomatic hesis when justifying the accent the justifying when hesis

Крайова . te Dobru the g

of different sides (not only the Romanian and the Bulgarian one) on Bulgarianon and one) (not onlythe Romanian of differentsidesthe

ncerningthe for the thesis mainly because of its focus on the last decisive years decisive last the on focus its of becausemainly thesis the for / A. Kuzmanova, A.Kuzmanova,

earlier politic and social and politic earlier her her

a dsue T dispute. jan The current thesis appeals to Iordachi’s analysis of the the of analysis Iordachi’s to appeals thesis current The 110

appurtenance of Southern Dobru Southern of appurtenance

at eas te author the because tant trbto of attribution can be seen as a very thorough investigation of the of investigation thorough very a as seen be can ja and the restitution of its Southern part to Bulgari to therestitutionSouthern part ofits and ja From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From 109 - 1940.

The author describes the Dobrujan problem Dobrujan the describes author The on deals he the international the

uhrs iw f oten Dobru Southern of view author’s of the propaganda on the international international the on propaganda the of European the tuation from the point of view of of view of point the from tuation ih th with . situation in the region and reasons and regionthe in situation Romanian aggressive policy of of policy aggressive Romanian hs da s hrd n widely and shared is idea This rds not only the political, but political, the only not rds pltcl ipts between disputes political e

, Sofia,1989 , oes ad hi interest their and powers”

ucsfly aae to manages successfully conte 108 ja. The book contains book The ja. ,

nia before 1913 before nia Bucureşti

only in cases when cases in only xt that enables the the enables that xt

, 2005

a as ja

that 25 a. a. , ,

CEU eTD Collection jglv rte tgte wt hs olaus including colleagues, his with together written Njagulov because Bulgarian itsfocus and side onthe oftheinternational reaction. of dispute debates. the of participants the of author) the by argued or supported be may (that opinions of analysis and used sources of variety simplis government the to assimilation 113 Dobruja 112 111 b War, World First the preceding period the views only not author the sides: different from exam an as serves book This another. one Rom the explore that attention special of establishment the on particulary concentrated works of examples the Dobrujan and trie public space national the of attempts the of analysis detailed most the gives presumably, book, The Balkans. the of population Vlach the in interest Romania’s and Bulgaria for case Macedonian cou neighboring Dobru overlapping their ho of examples important most the The history. Balkan Dobru

Andrea Schmidt Andrea А лгвс Нглв Итря а Добруджа на История Нягулов, Благовест

Кузманова a eand uiu pae rm h pit f iw f h bltrl eain o te two the of relations bilateral the of view of point the from place unique a remained ja ja” , Veliko Turnovo, 2007. Turnovo, Veliko , tic and tic The significant work of a major specialist on the Romanianon specialist major a of significantworkThe German A 112 cntut a ey eald e o eet ad hi eauto i the in evaluation their and events of set detailed very a constructs ,

/ A.Kuzmanova sometimes unreasonable. Nevertheless, Nevertheless, unreasonable. sometimes -

R tis h poie hs edr ih several with reader his provides he ntries; paid to the cases of Dobru of cases the to paid applications can be viewed in one defined region. Nj region. defined one in viewed be can applications ö - agae eerh f Schmidt of research language sler

book

anian strategies first in Dobru in first strategies anian .

Rumän , dealing with Northern as well as Southern Dobruja, Southern as well as Northern with dealing ,

, op. cit op. , ien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg, Weltkrieg, Ersten nach dem ien

, 1989, p. 18 , 1989, of s to produce a more s toproducea

Kuzmanova’s study is primarily useful fo useful primarily is study Kuzmanova’s w bugose n landowners” and “bourgeoisie the R ple of an analysis of the national and frontier disputes disputes frontier and national the of analysis an of ple . ja

omanian and Bulgarian nation nation Bulgarian and omanian Велико

and Banat. The author divides divides author The Banat. and - Rosler ja and then in Banat in then and ja

Търново

„objective” history of the„objective” territory history the book still provides the reader with the with reader the provides still book the Frankfurt a 113 ,

a b cniee oe f h rare the of one considered be can 2007

neetn prles uh as such parallels interesting Kuzmanova, „The history of of history „The Kuzmanova, - / M., 1994. M., Blagovest Njagulov, Njagulov, Blagovest - Bulgarian r Bulgarian 111 the a ,

gulov does not argue that arguethat not does gulov

and compare and s poal, extremely probably, is, R

omanian borders with borders omanian building projects and projects building he

r the current work current the r elations Blagovest elations is probably one of of one probably is r

text

em o the of terms

The history of of history The in two parts two in s

them with them ization of ization .

the the 26 ut

CEU eTD Collection Dobruja or par bigger The statistics. official the alter to info of sources as used arebooks focuses. anthropological their by distinguished be can which of some works special formation border the fromcomes also 116 115 limbamaterna in si invatamant religioasa viata spirituala, de viaţă repere Dobrogea: Ekrem, Ali Mehmet Norris, H.T. 114 data. important with source a reader as regarded is publication the provide and region the in living Romanians being diverse elements Bulgarian or Ottoman Byzantine, of role the underestimating one considered be may as thesis primary the source for also specifically article Rom the by another one of images the of creation the on focuses form and region, the in situation

Adrian Rădulescu, Ion Bitoleanu. Bitoleanu. Ion Rădulescu, Adrian R.Stanch Стоян historical writings, articles and periodi and articles writings, historical

one of the few, although non although few, the of one can offer a pattern of approaching the idea of idea the approaching of pattern a offer can

The nte impor Another relate more work A attention to the Muslim populationofDobrudja.attention tothe Muslim ethnic

Антонов ation of the opinion the of ation eva look sa i te Balkans the in Islam on on ie caatr f h pplto o te ein s hogl epoe i several in explored throughly is region the of population the of character mixed ,

„ landscape of the region. However, the book is book the However, region. the of landscape Les images de roumaine dans la littérature bulgare littérature dansla roumaine images de Les the

upon major cultural commonupon major for issues theBalkanarea. whole , Din istoria turcilor dobrogeni turcilor istoria Din Татарите historical side of the problem, it pro it problem, the of side historical

at ai o te urn research current the of basis tant - Stanch sided: it views only the hi the only views it sided:

в d to to d

about България

eva’s text eva’s Clmi, 19 Columbia, , Istoria românilor dintre Dunăre şi Mare: Dobrogea. Dobrogea. şi Mare: Dunăre dintre românilor Istoria .

rmation on the demo the on rmation the -

recent, publications that regard specifically the history of the of history the specifically regard that publications recent, them in the Bulgarian literature. As the big part of the of part big the As literature. Bulgarian the in them for general data general for

rpgnitc sus hn o description to than issues propagandistic , issues to the national the to issues Добрич , 115

cal literature of the chosen epoch chosen the of literature cal , Bucureşti, 1994, Nuredin Ibram Nuredin 1994, Bucureşti, , 93, C.D. Pariado, Pariado, C.D. 93, gives a brief idea of the representation of Romanians of representation the of idea brief a gives 2004/ , t

of these works examine the quatidienne life of of life quatidienne the examine works these of story of the Romanians in Dobru in Romanians the of story Stoian Antonov, Antonov, Stoian

this this on the region. The approach as well as the the as well as approach The region. the on grafic pecularity of the region the of pecularitygrafic

vides necessary co necessary vides , ” comparison. Although it does not focus not does it Although comparison. , auec’ ad ioen’ w Bitoleanu’s and Radulescu’s

in in istic orga i dobrogenii şi Dobrogea Etudes Balcaniques Etudes e

propaganda in the region, paying the in propaganda xtremely useful for the research research the for useful xtremely aas n Bulgaria in Tatars anians and Bulgarians, this this Bulgarians, and anians , Con , , that had constructed the the constructed had that Comuniatea musulmană din musulmană Comuniatea ntext that can include include can that ntext Bucureşti, 1979 Bucureşti, stanta, 1998 stanta,

that is actively used actively is that , Sofia,1994, ,

114 s , Constanta, 1905, 1905, Constanta, ,

f h general the of

Dbih 2004 Dobrich, , ja, sometimes sometimes ja, those Mostly and attempts and Mostly this this Mostly

nr3 ork

thesis

, 116 27 ,

CEU eTD Collection Western Renaissance and Enlightment. and Renaissance Western with analogies for looking awakanening, national Bulgarian the of „biography” the reconstructs T case. Romanian the to also applied be may that approaches and methods descriptive of of the authors andthecontext are tofit reviewed into reinterpreted inorder of the thesis. interpretations the of some however, study, current the to applied not is book the of organization 1990, 119 118 memory and Nation 117 overlappi the asp important such explores author The example. an as Guvezna of village Macedonian book organiz the of principle parallels examples inthe thesisassimilar oras beused thatwill other sides discourses. ofsimilar the how clarify c to and transmited invented, try are memories historical common essays The answer. to attempt they questions and choose, they data historical of terms in firstly, thesis, the for important are texts The off approach. and interdisciplinary region the of countries the all almost account into taking contexts, national Dobruja inthecurrent sudy. partia is frames explanatory sides. both by used ter in thesis the for essential that meanings social and economic

Maria Todorova, editor, editor, Todorova, Maria Anastasia N. Karakasidou Karakasidou N. Anastasia Daskalov the

119 Chicago,1997 The Much influenced by the sources listed above, the current thesis partly owes its structure, its owes partly thesis current the above, listed sources the by influenced Much Todorova Maria by edited essays collected of volume The

Bulg , eerhs h cnegn o te re ad ugra ntoaim, aig a taking nationalisms, Bulgarian and Greek the of converging the researches

theme of Roumen Daskalov’s research Daskalov’s Roumen of theme h mkn o a nat a of making The arian naional revival and the ways of its hisoriographical interpretations, uses uses interpretations, hisoriographical its of ways the and revival naional arian g nation ng . Budapest, 2004. . Budapest,

Daskalov’s atttempts to put the Bulgarian national revival in the in revival national Bulgarian the put to atttempts Daskalov’s

Balkan identities: nation and memory and nation identities: Balkan - ation of the analysis and plan to Anastasia Karakasidou’s study. The The study. Karakasidou’s Anastasia to plan and analysis the of ation , building Fields of wheat, hills of blood. Pa blood. of hills wheat, of Fields

m l ue i te ae f h Romanian the of case the in used lly

o i te akn. itrorpy f h Blain revival Bulgarian the of Historiography Balkans. the in ion

s of explanations it may give about the propagandistic strategies strategies propagandistic the about give may it explanations of s

projects and territorial disputes as religious propaganda, propaganda, religious as disputes territorial and projects h poes a occured had process the The historian also provides a solution that explains the the explains that solution a provides also historian The 117 , which is focused is which , , New2004 , York, ssages to Nationhood in Greek Macedonia 1870 Macedonia Greek in Nationhood to ssages ommemorated. The book constructs book The ommemorated.

n ifrn eoh. T epochs. different in

118 - ugra propaganda Bulgarian

specifically on the case the on specifically rsns h vrey of variety the presents

akn Identities Balkan i tx is text his

he author author he

changing changing ering an an ering ects of of ects

28 in in -

CEU eTD Collection lmns otsig utr ad ocpulzn ehiiy te oa elites local the ethnicity, conceptualizing and culture contesting as elements viewed are projects propagandistic competing case: Dobrujan the to dispute Macedonian a her introduces thesis the Karakasidou by found or elaborated concepts the Accepting territory. the over control political and social claiming parties competing Macedoniaand nott Greek with dealing although work, Her history. of reconstruction and competition educational 123 2001 NewYork, 122 121 2000. Balkans 120 cr The debate. the of participants Bulgarian and Romanian of texts the are work, the in used sources primary the thesis, the for Iordachi’sin the processabout research o proposed like theone of the borders esablishment dealing withthe publications asas several well work current the for essential become also nation a forming propagandisicin strategies Soviet Albanian century. 20th the into onwards stretching and 1870s sever in exploited actively are publications various of aspectspropagandistic the of limits the within itself pushes thesis this history, written as well as memory oral to refers regarded partly are borders the and agents

Peter Sahlins, Peter Austin, Robert en Martin Dean cadr Marinov, Tchavdar

al authors, presents an extremely useful example of propagandistic clashes evolving from evolving clashes propagandistic of example useful extremely an presents authors, al ,

Its methodology was partially borrowed for the current thesis as a logic analysis of two of analysis logic a as thesis current the for borrowed partially was methodology Its Although the boks mentioned above provide a theoretical as well as well as theoretical a provide above mentioned boks the Although other several Guvezna, of case the explores that book Karakasidou’s for Except Paris, 2010, Paris, texts producedtexts by Romanian andthe participantfromside. the Bulgarian - eba dsue vr an Nu i te 1920s. the in Naum Saint over dispute Serbian

Boundaries: the making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees the Spainin and France of making the Boundaries: Terry Founding a Balkan State, Albania’s experiment with democracy, 1920 democracy, with experiment Albania’s State, Balkan a Founding

Victor Roudometof, Roudometof, Victor ,

La question macédonienne de 1944 à nos jours: Communisme etnationalisme dans les les dans etnationalisme Communisme jours: nos à 1944 de macédonienne question La ouching theDobrujandispute h afraie cin mie ntos n ntoaim n h Sve Uin 1923 Union, Soviet the in nationalism and nations empire: action affirmative The

the Dobrujan projects of both sides exploiting and highlighting them in in them highlighting and exploiting sides both of projects Dobrujan

iterium of the choice is determined by the relations of the the of relations the by determined is choice the of iterium The

the

Macedonian question: culture, historiography, culture, question: Macedonian

f creatingf French the terms of similarities. Macedonian case, investigated by investigated case, Macedonian similarities. of terms as propagandistic constructs. Although the author author the Although constructs. propagandistic as , givesexcellent ofappro, anpattern 120

Another case that is briefly touched is the is touched briefly is that case Another 121 -

Spanish border. h researches The , Berkeley, , 1991. p proach to Guvezna and the the and Guvezna to proach - 1925

are seen as national national as seen are an an 123 , Toronto 2012. , Toronto

informative basis informative eiae t the to dedicated politics

ach. ach. , New York, York, New ,

1939 122 29 , ,

CEU eTD Collection several others play a very important role. important very a play others several them Among supported. they agenda the expressing materials the publish to able were who sphere pulic the primarily are thesis, the in used are works whose authors The Dobruja. over right Romanian justify to order in used were that products as only but history, Romanian the on For aspect. possible the avoid and te frames out picked the the approach unfocused limit to order In question. Dobrujan the to individuals Cernăuţi 1, nr. măgarilor Berlin de Congres възражданe, le Dobroudjaapres la de politique sort roumaines 124 built. are dispute Dobrujan the regarding conclusions the and assumptions the which on basis, as taken is it however, thesis, current the for useful partially only is pattern elaborated Their analysis. propose authors the propaganda, of phenomenon complicated the dedicatedto book O’Donnell’s Inand propaganda.Jowett’s the exploring of that is study, the in used is that approaches analyzing main the of one reason, this for and case propagandistic one of aspects various with deals research current The the attention closertheoretical tothe itself elaborated framework for thesis. the

ny r fw f h sou the of few are Only

. .

Bucureşti, 1998 Bucureşti, Lausanne, 1918 Lausanne, . instance, Nicolae Iorga’s works related to Dobruja are not to be analyzed as sources sources as analyzed be to not are Dobruja to related works Iorga’s Nicolae instance,

, 1920 София Nicolae Petrescu Nicolae .

, 1917, 1917, ,

, , I. N. Roman N. I. Milan cs sd r te olwn: A following: the are used rces ioa Petrescu Nicolae Markov

- Comnen 3. .

General theoreticalframework. “Proiecte, gesturi, cuvinte bulgăreşti”, cuvinte gesturi, “Proiecte, .

Bulgaria’s histor Bulgaria’s xts are seen only within the te the within only seen are xts , Milan Markov, Atanas Is Atanas Markov, Milan , - Comnen. 124

The refere The L ical rights to Dobroudja to rights ical Dobrogea a nas Sofia,1917 . tas nces to the works of those persons bring persons those of works the to nces

Is h irkov . ,

Paris . Чи С.

ten a a oruj et Dobroudja La ch

în Analele Dobrogei Analele în ,

irkov, Romulus Seisanu Romulus irkov, ли 1918 r m - нгиров . tp ln f propaganda of plan step

Bern 1918 Bern s of their propagandisic propagandisic their of s , tfn Zeletin Ştefan –

a territorial dis territorial a , investigation

the key the Добруджа Нашето Нашето Добруджа

, les revendications revendications les Milan

(A. D.) (A. - figures of figures . Markov Din ţara ţara Din

,anul I, I, ,anul of the the of pute,

and . 30 Le

CEU eTD Collection 5. 4. The structure the propaganda of organization Identification3. of thepropagandist which2. The in thepropaganda context occurs 1. The ideologyand ofthe purpose campaign propaganda for The 10divisions 126 125 predominantly b blood” extent some to applied approach sev of compilation H im propaganda of sides the to according thematically organized expression the in variations the by determined is approach the Therefore, study. the of objectives and purposes the to adjusted slightly is above, mentioned authors two the by proposed plan original the territory, frames the within limited is research the of focusthe As 10. Effectsand evaluation. 9. Counterpropaganda, present if 8. Audience tovarious techniques reaction effect7. Specialmaximize techniques to techniques6. Media utilization ence

Theaudience target Taken from Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O’Donnell, O’Donnell, Victoria and Jowett S. from Garth Taken See theintr See , 126

h poaad cmag i nt en s n sld bet o te nlss but analysis, the for object solid one as seen not is campaign propaganda the

ht rsns nation presents that oduction in in oduction ycompeting Greek and Slavic of propaganda in several spheres and by different authors. The chapters are are chapters The authors. different by and spheres several in propaganda of rl ie ta bid t p Tee part These up. it build that sides eral

investigation and given are O’Donnell by Jowett following: the

Anastasia N. Karakasidou Karakasidou N. Anastasia

by Anastasia Karakasidou in her book “Hills of wheat, fields of fields wheat, of “Hills book her in Karakasidou Anastasia by - ulig rcse wti propa within processes building

Fields of wheat, hills of blood., of hills wheat, of Fields

Propaganda and persuasion and Propaganda parties. parties.

of one aspect of claiming rights over the over rights claiming of aspect one of

ae netgtd ih h us the with investigated are s otn fr h cret thesis. current the for portant

adsi srtge used strategies gandistic Chicago, 1997 Chicago, , London, 2006, 270 p. ,London, 2006,

125

o the of e

31 as as

CEU eTD Collection s mte. h identifica The omitted. is techniques special the of use the as well as aspect this actors”, “public Bulgarian and Romanian the of texts published the to limited are research the in regarded techniques utilization media second the in introduced are audience target the and propaganda the of structure the as well as ideology, the and purposes The study. this in aside left is art or architecture in and appearing Romanian Propaganda authors. the Bulgarian of writings the in mostly the expressed propagandas of two element the the of comparison on concentrates thesis current the approach, Karakasiou’s at Orienting 129 128 127 of role essential the highlighting case, this in and, methods propagandistic various to appealing acce solution all an became the Albanian and 1922. state in1921 neighbor two between relations the damaged issue region”. border contested fiercely Naum that them of One with dispute Dobrujan the connecting in help they liste are that cases Similar one. publishing the is research current the for which of important most the activities, propagandistic some strategies by sides. implied both the of evaluationthe and comparisonthe alreadypresupposes dispute the analysisof the as thesis

Ibidem Austin, Smith, Ted

f h atce i te ok dtd y e Smith Ted by edited book the in articles the of n Vermosh and Robert Austin briefly describes the dispute, pointing out that the territorial battle quickly battle territorial the that out pointing dispute, the describes briefly Austin Robert O and Jowett by proposed pattern the on partly Basing

Founding a Balkan State. Albania’s experiment with Democracy with experiment Albania’s State. Balkan a Founding Propaganda: A pluralistic A Perspective Propaganda: td y oh f them. of both by pted - uoen ilmtc su ta cud ady rn Ygsai o Abna o a to Albania or Yugoslavia bring hardly could that issue diplomatic European

. “Assuming the most significant for both sides”, it became “their most most “their became it sides”, both for significant most the “Assuming . etoe svrl ie is times several mentioned

chapter and later viewed from other from viewed later and chapter in f h cutrrpgna s o icue i te upss f the of purposes the in included not is counterpropaganda the of tion

d by the authors are not important for the thesis as such, however, such, as thesisthe for important not are authors bythe d

128

Just like the Dobrujan case, the Saint Naum and Vermosh and Naum Saint the case, Dobrujan the like Just

129

Two , New York, 1989 York, New ,

tts re t ifune h Erpa powers, European the influence to tried states analogous the ing states significantly, ha significantly, states ing Yugoslavian 127

ht rpss eea ves on views several proposes that

precedents that appear in the thesis. the in appear that precedents sides in the following parts. As the As parts. following the in sides , 1920 , ’Donnell, the thesis also refers to to refers also thesis the ’Donnell, - - Albanian debate over Saint Saint over debate Albanian 1925, Toronto, 2012, 86 p. 2012, Toronto, 1925, ving been been ving ceded to ceded

the 32

CEU eTD Collection forming the nations. the forming re while territory the over rights justifying in experiments Soviet later the as well as context, back theintegrityownstates. oftheir bring or save to tried sides Bulgarian and Romanian the like just integrity, territorial Albanian maintain to order in powers propagandistic to appeal to tried Noli how of example interesting an Yugoslavian The land. contested the on situated monastery the măgarilor Dobroudja to rights historical 132 131 Union 130 the from chosen in are further regarded reasons of number a for were who authors actors” “public significant the of selection The dispute. the of stages earlier the regarding exceptions of appearance their of time the sides, two the of one of causes the of expression and support their topic, Dobrujan the to references less succ or more implying view, of point propaganda the from influential texts producing individuals as region”. the in powers national by game numbers a of part as “highly as to than other use little “of regarded and suspect” is data census the approach, Karakasidou’s Following dubious. highly seem cases manyin which statistics, real the of terms the in land the over rights justifying similar precedents.in these actors casesimportant Public asinthe Romanian as became of selection narrow a just make debate Naum Saint the and Karakasidou by detail in

Karakasidou Karakasidou Some of them are: are: them of Some For further details see Terry Martins, Martins, Terry see details further For , 1923 h Albani The The authors and the texts the and authors The resear the of scope The , essful manipulations with the data. with essful manipulations Bucureşti, 1998 Bucureşti, - 1939 Fields of of Fields ,New York, 2001 ,New York, Is an h 130

irkov wheat, hills of blood. blood. of hills wheat, - Yugoslavian example will be important for the thesis in the terms of of terms the in thesis the for important be will example Yugoslavian .

In this aspect the Soviet cases along with the Macedonian one, d one, Macedonian the with along cases Soviet the aspect this In .

La Dobr La .

Bern 1918, 1918, Bern

ch does not simply presuppose the presuppose simply not does ch 132 oudja et les revendications roumaines revendications les et oudja

that fits into the frames between 1913 and 1940 with several with 1940 and 1913 between frames the into fits that

used in the current research are chosen on the basis of their of basis the on chosen are research current the in used h afraie cin mie ntos n ntoaim n h Soviet the in nationalism and nations Empire: action affirmative The

Chicago, 1997, 16 Chicago,p. 1997,

Petrescu illustrate how they were employed for political purposes political for employed were they how illustrate

- Comnen. Comnen. L

Dobrogea a 131 -

Albanian debate also r also debate Albanian . Hence, “public actors” are seen are actors” “public Hence,

Lausanne, 1918, Markov 1918, Lausanne,

. ana

Paris lysis of published works published of lysis ,

1918 - , Bulgarian one. Zeletin . .

epresents Bulgaria’s Bulgaria’s escribed Din ţara ţara Din s to s

be be 33

CEU eTD Collection over another dominan linguistic of ideas and ties religious the to references inhabitants, local the of identity national the of characterization their land, the of history reconstruct to authors abov regarded is which propaganda, the In view. of points different from case same the presented c the propagandistic theterritorial aspects of battle betweenBulgaria. Romania and to enables hence, thesis, the because debate territorial asreligious well as the of Dobruja th that underline should one However, unreasonable). and grounded divide countries neighboring atr, neetd n h Dbua dsue Big novd n h agmns te all they arguments, the in involved Being dispute. Dobrujan the in interested hapters, The case of Dobruja in th in Dobruja of case The . roughout the centuries of the Ottoman centuries oftheroughout the

factor fte omnhsoia background. historical common the of used inmany similar d

h trioy vr hc te bt hv cam (oh we (both claims have both they which over territory the follow the processes happening in the region through the the through region the in happening processes the follow e period 1913 period e . mn te ihihe aspects highlighted the Among e. - 1940 is one of the examples of the way the two two the way the of examples the of one is 1940

situations couldsituations no

legacy was neither Romanian, nor Bu Romanian, nor neither was thesis

the majority of the populati the of majority the The theo The

their works are analyzed as as analyzed are works their t befully introduced inthis

remai retical framework of framework retical n the ways of the the of ways the n

ce of one group group one of ce lgarian, lgarian, on on 34 ll -

CEU eTD Collection uhrt dd o dsen h to ain fr ln pro o time. of period long a for nations two the discern not did authority the that so ethnicity, and language in differences the despite millet same the of part considered cen several contested The organique Règlement IIIBulgare. Annexe 1876. décembre 21 135 134 the however, Bulgaria, to 133 peninsula) Chalcidice the and valley Aliakmon Thessaloniki, of San of Treaty the later years as Bulgaria in included was part 1876. in conference Constantinople we Bulgaria autonomous of borders The well. as arena international the the to Bulgaria, in Similarlyonly not controversy great regions. rose dispute Macedonian other the question, Dobrujan in sides both by applied integration of attempts successful state. the in integrated be to had which region, the of part Northern the gained had Romania when import an play to began Macedonia”. of region the over competition national the of onset the with only markers politicized became identity, national often affiliation, religious and language vernacular Guvez the refer Ottoman population, 1830 population, Ottoman Chapter II. Chapter II.

Karakasidou, Karakasidou, For further details, see details, further For o frhr eal aot h pplto dt i data population the about details further For s Dobruja

to similar argument when describing the process of the establishment of the identities in in identities the of establishment the of process the describing when argument similar to The period preceding the Bulgarian the preceding period The strategies and their application in Dobruja, 1913 Dobruja, in application their and strategies territories that were formerly part of the collapsed Empire that defined their status for status their defined that Empire collapsed the of part formerly were that territories a omnt i Gek aeoi. h hsoin explains historian The Macedonia. Greek in community na turies. Nevertheless, the case is still specific as both Bulgarians and Romanians were were Romanians and Bulgarians both as specific still is case the Nevertheless, turies. dispute n Fields of wheat, hills of blood of hills wheat, of Fields Romanian and Bulgarian nationalisms, nation nationalisms, Bulgarian and Romanian

Conf - 1914: demogra 1914:

a b vee a tpcl mn the among typical as viewed be can n sca ad oiia rl ol atr h cnrs o Bri i 1878 in Berlin of congress the after only role political and social ant erence de Constantinople. Reunions Préliminaires. Compte rendu No. 8. Scéance du Scéance 8. No. rendu Compte Préliminaires. Reunions Constantinople. de erence - Stefano granted alm granted Stefano

134

recognition Similarly, Dobruja and the identities of the local inhabitants local the of identities the and Dobruja Similarly, 135 phic and social characteristics social and phic

, Chicago, 1997, p. 54 p. , Chicago, 1997, Macedonia with the exception of Thrace and its Southern its and Thrace of exception the with Macedonia - te toa Epr bfr is olpe see collapse its before Empire Ottoman the n Romanian clash in 1913 is marked by more and less and more by marked is 1913 in clash Romanian

of the Bulgarian character of the province. Two Two province. the of character Bulgarian the of

ost the whole of Macedonia (with the exceptionthe (with Macedonia of whole the ost

cited as key aspects of Greek or Bulgarian Bulgarian or Greek of aspects key as cited

, Madison, Wisconsin, 1985 Wisconsin, Madison, , iia dbts eadn the regarding debates similar 133

atsa Karakasidou nastasia ht ise sc as such “issues that re first drawn at the the at drawn first re - 1940. 1940. - building Kemal Kemal

but on but Karpat, Karpat, 35

CEU eTD Collection the land and an effort to overcome the external pressure by uniting the Slavic elements of the the of elements Slavic the uniting by pressure external the overcome to effort an and land the react a by propagated Misirkov historian ideology and philologist national Macedonian of emergence later The Serbia. and Bulgaria Ottoman the to back lands these Empire. of part bigger the gave followed that Berlin of congress 1918. 140 in 1894 Thrace and Macedonia программа 139 264. p. Press, University State 138 137 136 the Dobrujan one. to case Macedonian the in applied strategies their of many transmitted and dispute Macedonian t of many Hence, Romania Ishirkov, by Anastas like dispute, Dobrujan the of state participants the from taken completely been had that Dobruja from propaganda its redirect to had Bulgaria weakened wars Organization, Preobrazheniere Revolutionary Macedonian Internal the of 1878 in revolutionaries distinct the of development the Macedonian identity. separate of reasons major the of one as seen be can state Bulgarian one, Bulgarian identi Macedonian The Macedonian”. a “being of idea the within region ,John

Misha Дмитрий Ishir

Brian D. Joseph, Joseph, D. Brian

kov,, ion of the local elite to the Greek the to elite local the of ion Shea The outcomes of the T the of outcomes The h suppress The

136 Glenny Glenny ,

практика

Лабаури a Mac doine et a constitution de l Exarchat bulgare l8 0 l8 bulgare l Exarchat de constitution a et doine Mac a Macedoni 138 The Balkans: Nationalism, War,a Nationalism, Balkans: The volt caused Bulgaria to retreat, losing its position in the region. After the Balkan the region. After the in position its losing retreat,Bulgaria to caused volt

nevertheless, the fails of the Bulgarian attempts to integrate Macedonia in the in Macedonia integrate to attempts Bulgarian the of fails the nevertheless, When Languages Collide: Perspectives on Language Conflict, Compe and Coexistence and Compe Conflict, Language on Perspectives Collide: Languages When

Болгарское

a and Greece: The Struggl Greece: The and a политической

o o te Kresna the of ion - 1879, the development of development the 1879,

- 1908. Ideology, program, Ideology, 1908.

национальное

reaty of Berlin turned Macedonia into a land contested by Greece, by contested land a into Macedonia turned Berlin of reaty

борьбы 137

and several other activists can be viewed to some extent as extent some to viewed be can activists other several and , София -

e to Define a New Balkan Nation ato New e Balkan Define Serbian движение nd the Great1804 the Powers, nd - alg piig ognzd y h Bulgarian the by organized uprising, Razlog , 2008/ Dmitri 2008/ ,

practive of political struggle political of practive - Bulgarian attempts to justify their rights over over rights their justify to attempts Bulgarian the

Македонии active Bulgarian propaganda, the creation creation the propaganda, Bulgarian active

Labauri 140 - l897) avec une carte hors text, hors carte une avec l897)

139 were also actively involved in the in involved actively also were

the Фракии , – The Bulgarian national movement in movement national Bulgarian The 1999, h fiue f h Ilinden the of failure the ot aeoi to Macedonia lost ,

p.204

2000, pp. 135 pp. 2000,

ty could coexist with the with coexist could ty , Sofia,2008 , в

1894

– 1908 1908

– гг 37. .,

Идеология

Lausanne, Lausanne, the lost lost the , Ohio , he he 36 - ,

CEU eTD Collection utrl assimilation cultural Balkans. the in west the "European stigm was str political its adapt to Russia. to identity, Romanian distinct a with region a Bessarabia, cede to had Romania 1878 in Dobruja for exchange In them. incorporating problem similar faced Romania Bulgaria, Like studies Dobrog 146 elements. other and 145 144 143 1913 142 question." "Bessarabian 141 War. Balkan Second the of end the by successful rather be to proved Romania in Dobruja Northern of incorporation the of process The Balkan Dobruja 1913. again came wars back to after only befo issues Bessarabian and Transylvanian on concentrated more politics, Romanian the of assimilation. their of methods active the accept to ready always not were that own 20 defined strongly with population its with identities. Banat for suitable not be to out turned Dobruja state. federative a centralized or highly country a creating about debates internal Romanian the of part dispute Dobrujan that underlined Dobrogea”.

th Andrea, Andrea, chapter. current in foundthe further be to are accountsquestion this detailed on More The Transylvanian elites, for instance, consisted not only of Romanians, but also included German, Hungarian Hungarian German, included also but Romanians, of only not consisted instance, for elites, Transylvanian The Iordachi, Iordachi, o frhr eal, see details, further For o frhr eal, see details, further For

, century, other pro other century,

Pittsburgh, 2002, p. 15 Pittsburgh,2002, , Budapest, 2001 Budapest, , ea into Romania, 1878 Romania, into ea These strategieswerere partially Schmidt 144 atized iiesi, nation Citizenship, mission" to mission" 142

Hence, while Northern Dobruja adopted Romanian identity by the beginning of the of beginning the by identity Romanian adopted Dobruja Northern while Hence,

the appearance of Greater Romania on the European political map made the the made map political European the on Romania Greater of appearance the -

Rosl as

, S.l.: s.n., 191 s.n., S.l.:

er, er, bcwr, niiie pr o te Orient the of part uncivilized backward, a

economic modernization and administrative colonization implemented in implemented colonization administrative and modernization economic vinces that came under Romanian control had in many cases elites of their their of elites cases many in had control Romanian under came that vinces

introduce Ruma Constantin ategies to the new situation. Constantin Iordachi point out: “ out: point Iordachi Constantin situation. new the to ategies

- Krupenskii Nikolaevich Aleksandr 1913” in 1913” This -

nien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg, Weltkrieg, Ersten dem nach nien n state and

143 9. self

Ior high culture in the province, so as to extend the boundaries the extend to as so province, the in culture high

Nation h strat The - dachi - legitimizing legitimizing ulig te nerto o Nrhr Dboe it Rmna 1878 Romania, into Dobrogea Northern of integration the building: - 146 - , used in the dispute o used in the dispute

building and contested identities. Romanian and Hungarian case Hungarian and Romanian identities. contested and building “The California of the Romanians: the integration of Northern Northern of integration the Romanians: the of California “The

oee, ih h tasto o te hl province whole the of transition the with However, ge o asmlto ad ooiain ple in applied colonization and assimilation of egies 141

After accepting Northern Dobruja, Romania had Romania Dobruja, Northern accepting After artv ws sd o utf te program the justify to used was narrative s of justifying claims over territories and and territories over claims justifying of s Frankfurt am Main, 1994, p. p. 264 1994, amFrankfurt Main, ad lxnr C. Schmidt. Ch. Alexandre and ,

f 1913 - and it was Romania's noble noble Romania's was it and - 1940. However, i 1940. However,

- 145 279

“ What is the the is What t should be t should

The focus The

Dobrogea re the the re 37 of of of -

CEU eTD Collection state the territorial debate of start the with meaning new obtained region whole the of population the of affiliations national Dobruja Bulgaria. to losses and Romania to expansions territorial post new the of light the in started land, Northern its over also but under the later. anargument as which notpresent he does bloodline, the exactly than rather the Bulgarians, heritageof 147 Balkan the among might military biggest the become will Bulgaria borders today’s of limits the one. Romanian the over race Bulgarian the of superiority Romanian the “All form: following the in king the with talked having after impressions his me transmitted has Furstenberg “Prince relations: Austrian the of G Nikola minister foreign Bulgarian the to write would politician, 5 the On according experiencesapproa totheirand previous Great the by influenced very 20 the of phenomenon. elaborated and complicated a presents territories acquired or lost the of integration the of scope the with propaganda the up building of process the and Romania

It should be noted that Radev’s use of the word “race” is m is “race” word the of use Radev’s that noted be should It - building The dispute concerned dispute The th

th Romanian control the notonly conflictDobruja, itsSouthernpart,control over Cadrilater, over Romanian

century it had its own paths of development and its own directions, which, althou which, directions, own its and development of paths own its had it century f oebr 93 ien ae, Blain itra, orait dpoa and diplomat journalist, historian, Bulgarian a Radev, Simeon 1913 November of 1 .

taeis f the of strategies

Contesting culture and transforming identities: Bulgarian and - ugra dpoay n h pae f orj i te Bulgarian the in Dobruja of place the on diplomacy Hungarian .

Powers, were still still were Powers, the rights over the province that had to match with the nation the with match to had that province the over rights the

two

onre. hrfr, h nation the Therefore, countries. Romanian state projects. designed by the Romanian and Romanian the by designed s, beginning with the king, feel the physical physical the feel king, the with beginning s, ches.

ore relevant to the superior cultural and historical historical and cultural superior the to relevant ore

147

They are convinced that even withineven that convinced are They - enadiev regarding the opinion opinion the regarding enadiev war situation that had brought had that situation war ’s past and present and the the and present and past ’s - formation in Bulgaria and and Bulgaria in formation

By the beginning beginning the By

Bulgarian side Bulgarian - Romanian

and and gh 38 s

CEU eTD Collection its opponentsits andpotential allies. self a of sort a with itself providing Balkans, the Bulgaria unless lands, situation the adaptedto of loss the and consequences miserable to lead would treaty the that realized fully capital, Romanian the in plenipotentiary minister remaining himself and Bucharest later which affairs, diplomatic the in engaged being Radev, region. the of part Southern the Cadrilater, concerning plans Romanian the of seriousness states”. 152 1878 after and see before Dobruja Northern the regarding society Romanian the in controversies the on details further s romanesti Interese Cadrilaterului. Chestiunea 1947) 151 wellofth as analysis chapter as the the third in is presented reaction 150 Sim work significant his see Berlin 149 histo , 191 relations”, Romanian Austrian the of opinion the regarding Genadiev N. румънските Генадиев 148 shameful bythe doubled border, strategic the to related argument idiotic the than other Cadrilater of annexation order my on Ministry the of officials do the of research “The Cadrilater: of annexation the about write would Minister, Foreign later and politician journalist, Dobruja. Northern regarding dispute previous a be to appeared first Cadrilater of annexation the of idea mere the state the building of outcome natural a as presented be to country the into Dobruja of incorporation

Manoilescu, Manoilescu, For further details on the reactions to the possibilities of acquiring Cadrilater see Cadrilater acquiring of possibilities the to reactions the on details further For For further details on Radev’s views and considerations about the period preceding and following the treaty of of treaty the following and preceding period the about considerations and views Radev’s on details further For The propaganda in art and architecture of Dobruja is left aside in the thesis. The analysis of the international international the of analysis The thesis. the in aside left is Dobruja of architecture and art in propaganda The “ Кузманова eon eon ry of Dobruja”, Sofia, 1992, p. 237 Sofia,1992, Dobruja”, ryof Из Bcrsi 19, . 153 p. 1998, Bucuresti, ,

Radev 148 ut l Just рапорт

process that had already put already had that process относно

hs accoun This отноения ,

. The The Dictatl de la Viena, Memorii: iulie Memorii: Viena, la de Dictatl k Blai, oai hd o ado to had Romania Bulgaria, ike От

на

argument of the compensation for Bulgarian territorial growth”. territorial Bulgarian for compensation the of argument

builders of the modern Bulgaria modern the of builders

Ньой мнението пълномощния ”/“From the report of the entrusted minister in Bucharest Bucharest in minister entrusted the of report the ”/“From

до . Radev’s country had to continue continue to had country Radev’s . md i 11 b Rdv tl peevs h tae o dut bu the about doubt of traces the preserves still Radev by 1913 in made t

published in “ in published

Кр uet o te Bu the of cuments

- айова Симеон 157; на

министър австро

Iordachi, :

149 / Kuzmanova,

Радев

Извори

унгарската its roots in the “prepared” soil. “prepared” the in roots its s

, dd o dsoe ee a rc o jsiiain o the for justification of trace a even discover not did , Citizen i revizionism bulgar, 1938 bulgar, revizionism i в Строителите

- -

august 1940 august Букурещ Hungarian diplomacy on the place of Dobruja in the Bulgarian the in Dobruja of place the on diplomacy Hungarian за , v. 1,2, v. 1,2, , Sofia,1973.

hrs Pae T Peace charest историята From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From hp Nto ad State and Nation ship, 151

- дипломация oriented propaganda that had to influence also also influence to had that propaganda oriented

t h srtge ta cud lo te fully the allow could that strategies the pt С n h 4s ial aolsu a Romanian a Manoilescu, Mihail 40s the In . , Bucuresti, 1991, 179 p. 1991, Bucuresti, , Радев

на на eutd n h sgig f h T the of signing the in resulted e audience and its reactions. reactions. its and audience e

cons Добруджа съвременна

до

за reaty of 1913, undertaken by the the by undertaken 1913, of reaty ider

министъра - 1940 мястото - ing , Building ”, ”, Sofia, 1989, p Sofia,1989, lmost as contradictory as the the as contradictory as lmost

Bcrsi 20, p 2005, Bucuresti, , София България

itself the greatest power on on greatestpower the itself S. Radev to the foreign minister minister foreign the to Radev S.

150 Keith

. p. 9 pp. , на For the Romanian side Romanian the For

на , 1992/ “Sources about the the about “Sources 1992/ ,

Hitchins Hitchins

Добруджа , външните т p . 1,2, 1,2, . - . 18 .

0 n Ungureanu and 10 152

- Romania (1866 Romania Nevertheless, 19 София p

19 . работи в

reat българо - 1973 , 5 For 25 y of of y

39 Н / - - - - . , ,

CEU eTD Collection n otmoay oai: Smlr o te Es Erpa ntoaim, h Romanian the nationalisms, European East other to “Similar Romania: contemporary in Bulgarian methods those Moreover, states. their into region the of whole the incorporating of strategies the develop to had countries both 1940, in parts two Bulgaria and Romania between border the of establishment later the and 1919 regainin and loss laterterritory, the its annexationof the possiblereactionsto all of spite in Dobruja 154 case studies Hungarian D Petrescu Trencsenyi, in published 153 the attacking of scope the for bands armed gathered actively organization revolutionary Dobrujan Union. Soviet the in even or Federation Communist the either into revolutionary Dobrujan Internal au the requested organization the 1919 after Romania to Dobruja Southern of transition the opposing was that Dobruja of convention Great the of basis the on Founded region. the in agai struggling were that Dobruja in organizations wasbeing tolet the not region fullyintegratedintoRomania. Romani the for task difficult highly a be to seemed border new the again once establishing Bulgaria, from taken land of part homogeneous non highly a integrating of idea The itself. phenomenon the of essence the with than pattern method the with more menaces”.deals affirmation this of out comes that question internal and external from nation Romanian the preserve to attempts that Nation the of image the by (determined authoritarianism suffused 19 the in developed (as philosophy essentialist ethnic an combines nationalism

Marius See

Romanian authorities and Vlach and Romanian colonists brought from other parts of of parts other from brought colonists Romanian and Vlach and authorities Romanian Володя , Sofia, 2007, p Sofia,2007, , Marius Turda Marius Bulgarian attempts to achieve this aim resulted in the creation the in resulted aim this achieve to attempts Bulgarian

Turda nationalistic propaganda.nationalistic

, Милачков “Transylvania revisited: Public discourse and historical representation in contempor in representation historical and discourse Public revisited: “Transylvania , Budapest, 2001, p. p. 198 2001, Budapest, , p . 341 .

points out in his article about public discourse and historical representation historical and discourse public about article his in out points /

Volodja - 407

tonomy of the region with later possibilities of integrating the land land the integrating of possibilities later with region the of tonomy

, Petrescu Petrescu ,

iaho, in Milachkov,

C .

etc.(ed.) etc.(ed.) an state an Нягулов Nation nst the Romanian authorities and their power power their and authorities Romanian the nst -

building project. Bulgarian scope, however, however, scope, Bulgarian project. building История had to be generated by Romanian and and Romanian by generated be to had - building and contested identities: Roma identities: contested and building

на

Добруджа - tt) ad traditionalism a and State), 154 s serving this nationalism this serving s

of h Blain Internal Bulgarian The /

dividing Dobruja into into Dobruja dividing several revolutionary several Njagulov th

century) wit century)

The history of of history The ary Romania” ary 153 nian and nian

The h a h 40 -

CEU eTD Collection for Bulgaria, the strategies applied in the Dobrujan case, were some were case, Dobrujan the in applied strategies Bulgaria,the for Southern Dobruja, As Bulgarian. be to right their for struggle to Bulgarians local the convincing region the in identities Romanian contesting Bulgariancommunity. t not but Organization, Revolutionary Macedonian Internal the implied originally that term the using “komitadji”, bands the called side Romanian The Balkans. the and Romania 158 157 question Macedonian the and Bulgaria, Greece, pr le et 156 155 central Bulgarian t managedgovernment Bulgarian the Yetpowers. the with accordance without and independently cases many in acted, that organizations Dobrujan the over control strong have to seem not did itself government Bulgarian governme Bulgarian the from directly came it statements propaganda Romanian the to according however, Sofia; and Bulgaria Northern in organizations emigrants’ the stood propaganda this Behind agents. and leaflets newspapers, the through rule agains Romanian fight intensive to population the Bulgarian the Bulgaria mobilize to Northern operated Cadrilater from in propaganda Appearing Dobruja. Southern from emigrants by the from to provea vitally thatDobrujaof the was important Bulgarian part state. on not reaction Macedonia.

Ibidem Schmidt Schmidt For further details on the Macedonian question see question Macedonian the on details further For esent ugras state Bulgaria’s Schmidt

- - population itself, the political motives derived from Bulgaria being influenced mainly mainly influenced being Bulgaria from derived motives political the itself, population Rosler, Rosler, Rosler, ,

156 2 nd

ed, Sofia, 1926 and Victor and 1926 Sofia, ed, Andrea Schmidt ly to the transition of the territory, but also to the Bulgarian propaganda that had that propaganda Bulgarian the to also but territory, the of transition the to ly - olr n Rosler Rum Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach Rumanien anien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach anien

155 -

ulig rjc rgrig orj ws any ocnrtd on concentrated mainly was Dobruja regarding project building ts ht while that otes

- Rosler explains the emergence anti the the Rosler explains of

Roudometof

Westport, 2002 Westport,

h poet poal a a id f self of kind a as “probably protest the and Northern, was not the only territory important important territory only the not was Northern, and Georgi , Frankfurt am Main, 1994, p 1994, amFrankfurt Main, , ,

Frankfurt am Main, 1994, p. 101 1994, amFrankfurt Main, Collective memory, national identity, and ethnic conflict ethnic and identity, national memory, Collective o achieve the scope of attracting part of foreign of attractingpart of scope achievethe o

Bazhdarov,

a uestion mac donien mac uestion a times similar to those used in used those to similar times 157 p nt - . 101 . Romanian gangs as theRomanian ”

. 158

- 1

03 eetees the Nevertheless,

- ees came defense ne dans le pass pass le dans ne he Dobrujan Dobrujan he the t 41

CEU eTD Collection cuyn Bsaai ad oten Bucovina Northern and Bessarabia occupying successf could longer no Romania nation. the of unification the of argument Bulgarian used actively the with even result significant no Bulgarianside, the for support 1919,showingsome in Paris in conference Turkeyworld and otherandEuropean several Powers. emerged newly France, Germany, between balance to trying dispute, Dobrujan the to attention Building Nation Regionalism, Romania: Greater 163 162 161 275 160 159 contemporary of several part, current the In chapter. following the in analyzed thoroughly are “acting” of methods and roles whose representatives, its of need in was it that, than more even but investments, state required 1913, before Cadrilater in inexistent culture” Romanian “blooming The lands. the over claims territorial justifying and region the in culture Romanian flourishing countr the of Dobruja in life of sides possible the all embraceand state the from come to hadpropaganda the scope, this For province. s to had that propaganda active the for open Romanian side toassimilate and colonizetheregion. organized badly rather the of signing the until 1919 Since

Нягулов Ibidem p modernization and powers foreign involvementthe of The For further details on the general cultural aspects in inte in aspects cultural general the on details further For Kuzanova/

Although the United States insisted on the Dobrujan question Dobrujan the on insisted States United the Although For Romania Dobruja, especially its newly acquired Southern part, turned into a territory a into turned part, Southern acquired newly its especially Dobruja, Romania For

, История Кузманова y by offering them place to stay and land to cultivate, creating and building building and creating cultivate, to land and stay to place them offering by y reflections about reflections

на

in Добруджа . 162 Нягулов teps o oiie h lcl ugra pplto ad rvn the prevent and population Bulgarian local the mobilize to attempts

I t had to attract the settlers, Aromanians, or migrants from other partsother from migrants or Aromanians, settlers, the attract to had t

163

/ , the processes happening in Romania and Bulgaria that enable the the enable that Bulgaria and Romania in happening processes the Njagulov Njagulov История , hardly existent in Northern Dobruja before 1878 and 1878 before Dobruja Northern in existent hardly , T reaty of Craiova Dobruja became a region for Bulgarian Bulgarian for region a became Dobruja Craiova of reaty

The history of Dobruja of history The

and Ethnic Struggle, 1918 Struggle, Ethnic and на ly pel o h ie o “ugra dne” after danger” “Bulgarian of idea the to appeal ully

Добруджа 161 hape the Romanian identity and culture of the the of culture and identity Romanian the hape

rwar Romania see Romania rwar n fliln te ln f rae Romania. Greater of plan the fulfilling and rojects are viewed fourth inare the rojects the texts that appear later are briefly seen as as seen briefly are later appear that texts the

/ 159 Njagulov

, Sofia, 2007, p Sofia,2007, ,

- 1930 The history of Dobruja of history The Irina , , 1995 being solved on the peace peace the on solved being

Livezeanu, p

. 290 . 160

the conference gaveconferencethe - 301 chapter. Cultural politics in in politics Cultural

, Sofia, 2007, p. 2007, Sofia, ,

almost 42

CEU eTD Collection presented similar patterns of approach to the question. They appealed to natural right and to the to and right natural to appealed They question. the to approach of patterns similar presented usually authors the backgrounds, different having Although region. Bulgarian truly or Romanian and Romanian the arguments i present thesis current the in role analytic important most the and i identities whole the of understanding the clarify and facilitate to observer 167 166 165 in limited are Dobruja in nation 164 Bulgarian the of ideas author’s The 1919. to comes gradually borders. depriving of act contradictory San of treaty the following shaping border every the states Dobrujapart and of place asBulgarian its theRomanian or state. at speech a for material pamphlet educational leaflets, novels, memoirs, presenting genres, different to belong taken, philo e only not were people those Among debate. Dobrujan the of territory the entered unwillingly or willingly who individuals Bulg or Romanian truly their of unaware cases many (in population its and province the of identity cultural the in manifestation pronouncedly R

Bulgaria Ibidem, as Ic transliterated Also As an example see Vladescu’s book book Vladescu’s see example Asan Ischirkoff, sophers, but, for instance, a painter. a instance, for but, sophers, The texts of several active participants of the territorial debate from both sides that play play that sides both from debate territorial the of participants active several of texts The A its find to had character” Bulgarian or Romanian “pronouncedly of notion mere The 166

nasta

p. , , Bucures argument of Dobruja being the natural continuation of the Bul the of continuation natural the being Dobruja of argument

11 h tx bgn wt te itr o th of history the with begins text The

Les bulgares en Dobroudja. Aper Dobroudja. en bulgares Les

s Is s n Dobruja in 1913 n Dobruja omanian/Bulgarian characteromanian/Bulgarian province. of the ti, 1926. ti, hirko

hirkov and Ischircov depending on the source and the language of publication. of the language and the source on depending Ischircov and hirkov v

165 the conference, all of them can be united b united be can them of all conference, the

in his work “The Bulgarians in Dobruja” already in the introduct the in already Dobruja” in Bulgarians “The work his in minent historians like historians minent

Bulgarian side Bulgarian the - - 1940.

Ch arian identity and affiliation) that had to be described by by described be to had that affiliation) and identity arian ugra nto o a hne o eeo wti is natural its within develop to chance a of nation Bulgarian ristian M. ristian

cu historique et ethnographique et cu historique 164

Vla s Although the texts, from which the information is information the which from texts, the Although

commonly used to generate the idea of the truly the of idea the generate to used commonly descu

frt ugra kndm (679 kingdom Bulgarian first e Iorga or Mutafchiev, diplomats, journalists or journalists diplomats, Mutafchiev, or Iorga , - tfn i peetd y h ato a a as author the by presented is Stefano Bulgarii: memorile unui ofit unui memorile Bulgarii:

trsig elcin about reflections nteresting , practice

Berne, 1919, p 1919, Berne, y the idea of their relation to to relation their of idea the y garian state; generally, generally, state; garian

of contesting culture culture contesting of er roma er p . . 8 - - 10 1018) n fost prizonier prizonier fost n

167

s or or s and ion the 43

CEU eTD Collection ein etrn smlr hms bt ih srne eooia ad politi and géographie, economical stronger a with but themes, similar featuring region 169 Dobruja, who had thought that they were forever delivered to the Romanian yoke. They could could They yoke. Romanian the to delivered forever were they that thought had who Dobruja, Northern from Bulgarians the among especially population, Dobrujan the among disillusion “pai was that territory the regain to order in elements Bulgarian existing the mobilize to had they of the region. integration the for “price” the paid of but region,notthe overrealization onlythe rights of within 171 170 168 nature”. violent a of be also should assimilation the that natural quite was it Romania, to alien totally ju of was country the of complexion real the since “And out: points Markov identity, author) the to according Bulgarian, (predominantly its “changing und Dobroudja”. the of to character as itself, Romania from originating demonstration, striking most the itself in “constitutes Romania into region whole the of integration the and colonization a the of varied populationoftheregion. element other any or Turkish Tatar, Romanian, particular any omits however, author “Bulgarian Is Dobruja, of congresses interests”. political and economical foreign the for coin exchange peopl Bulgarian the of sacrifices the all after how, understand not gmns ttn ta te ugra rssac wti Dbua te oain teps of attempts Romanian the Dobruja, within resistance Bulgarian the that stating rguments

ya bfr 1919 before year A Ibidem Markov, Isc b bod. Is blood”. by d hirkoff,pp. Unli Milan Markov, another Bulgarian voice in the debate, would present very similar similar very present would debate, the in voice Bulgarian another Markov, Milan 171 , p. 15 p. , histoire, ethnographie, importance économique politique économique et importance ethnographie, histoire, The political fate of Dobroudja after the Berlin congress Berlin the after of Dobroudja fate political The

- Here the polemics acquired new traits, being driven towards the edges of the clashes the of edges the towards driven being traits, new acquired polemics the Here thinking” audience, the “affirmed the audience, thinking” ke Romania ke

126 - 127 ,

Ischirkoff published another book regarding the problem of the appurtenance of Dobruja Dobruja of appurtenance the of problem the regarding book another published Ischirkoff

hirkov ns, Bulgarians, according to Is to according Bulgarians, ns, 170 hirkov

takn te oain oiy f siiaig h rgo and region the assimilating of policy Romanian the Attacking rts “h pae f uhrs i 11 pooe t provoked 1918 in Bucharest of peace “The writes:

ihihs h eitne f h “Bulgarian the of existence the highlights nation” that was already present in the land. the in present alreadywas that nation” hirkov , Sofia, 1919, p. p. 32 Sofia,1919, , st such a nature, since Dobroudja was Dobroudja since nature, a such st , Sofia,1918 , , did not need to “colonize” Dobruja Dobruja “colonize” to need not did , cal accent. See Ishirkov, Ishirkov, See accent. cal e, they could again become the become again could they e, 168

eciig h Nat the Describing

sual Bulgarian isputable - feeling” and and feeling” La Dobroudja; Dobroudja; La e great he 169 ional

The 44

CEU eTD Collection for instance), the “Memoir from the Central National Council of Dobroudja to the the to Dobroudja of Council National Central st the the of representatives from “Memoir the instance), for Ischirkoff, of casethe in (like events historical the of interpretations the on oriented less view, of Bulgarian) and (Romanian local the to audience extent less much a to and foreign the to generally programs cultural two of 175 1928 174 173 42. p. 1919, Sofia, nations”, amongthe thepeace restore 172 nation”, butalsothe “competing state prosper. provi a as also but culture, Bulgarian the of center essential an as simplynot Dobruja view would instance, for Penakov, Ivan dispute. the of T the of outcomes “equal had Romanians could no the rights”,which they however, Romanians”…., the under now having are they which guarantees, the all the under even had Dobroudja of inhabitants the times normal cases some com atrocities the to refer generally Dobruja, in domination oppression”. Romanian “unbearable the against fighting and population homogeneous its with Bulgaria Greater constructing of ideas Bulgarian to refers

The modernization projects connect projects modernization The Ibidem See Ivan, Ivan, See “Memoir from the Central National Council of Dobroudja to the representatives representatives the to Dobroudja of Council National Central the from “Memoir

Very similar accounts of the Bulgarian con Bulgarian the of accounts similar Very n ae txs te uhr vee te problem the viewed authors the texts, later In 174 . 25 . –

Penacoff the centers of the Romanian and centers ofculture. Bulgarian the Hence, the author introduced not only the argument of “natural development of the of development “natural of argument the only not introduced author the Hence,

they appeal they , reaty of Bucharest, they paid more attention to the social and economic sides economic and social the to attention more paid they Bucharest, of reaty

Le problem de la Dobroudja de Sud. Un aspect econ aspect Un Sud. de Dobroudja la de problem Le

to supporting to ts ald oehr o etr te ec aog h ntos generally nations” the among peace the restore to together called ates -

the Romanian and the Bulgarian one one Bulgarian the and Romanian the

ed to the region are viewed in the in viewed are the region to ed

- evidence and in some absolutely neglect absolutely some in and evidence building projects”, which matters for the for projects”,whichcurrent matters building part. t

secure tothem”. c ta cud lo te ugra nto to nation Bulgarian the allow could that nce temporaries, but presented from another point point another from presented but temporaries, 172 similarly;

The attacks directed to the Romani the to directed attacks The fourth

itd y h lcl uhrte. I authorities. local the by mitted 173 Turks all the liberties and almost and liberties the all Turks omique et social de ce problem. ce de social et omique

chapter.

oee, k however, –

both aimed at presenting presenting at aimed both of the states called together to to together called states the of

now these aspects: “In “In aspects: these ing better the the better ing , Paris, Paris, , 175

45 an n

CEU eTD Collection piece of land stretching from the Black sea to the Danube, Romania as a state and Romanians as Romanians and state a as Romania Danube, the to sea Black the from stretching land of piece Roma Romania’s to appealing preserves work Stoica’s signed, was Bucharest of treaty the before years ten Dobruja?” in representweIorga’s do “WhatIn accordancewith oppression”. act to referred openly Stoica, Vasile Dobruja. Romanian the of image an construct to order in sid Bulgarian the Like law”. 181 180 179 Iorga, 178 177 176 pr Romania. of borders the within region the of prosperity the assured that regime successful “exceptionally” Romanian flourishing existing of constitution” “exceptionalthe to according regulated and “indivisible” being nation as well as state Romanian the of importance Do of constitution the and regime “Exceptional called part comp a as viewed is Macedonia, from migrants by mainly region, the of colonization The province. the of history political the to p different in structure ethnical and resources natural its from region the of aspects the all regards that book detailed very his in Seisanu, Romulus author, Romanian another by elaborated a nation turned tobeincomplete.

oject of centralization that included Dobruja as just one of the provinces that had to be fully fully be to had that provinces the of one just as Dobruja included that centralization of oject Ibidem R Ibidem Vasile Nicolae vss paety iwd hs “iiiig cin” s h aray etoe “Romanian mentioned already the as actions” “civilizing these viewed apparently ivists Ibidem. Apparently, by “exceptional constitution” Seisanu views the “progressive and innovative Romanian Romanian innovative and “progressive the views Seisanu constitution” “exceptional by Apparently, Ibidem.

Seisanu,

Valenii de munte,191 Valenii de t hud e oe ta ee i te oain ae t s mosbe o ak bu one about talk to impossible is it case Romanian the in even that notes be should It of idea The

Stoica , p. 13 p. , , p. 202 p. ,

Iorga, Iorga,

Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula gurile Dunarii Dobrogea,

- ed. ed. 18

Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianuar 1910 de Nicolae de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce

The Dobrogea The

“colonization” for making a nation “complete” was very thoroughly thoroughly very was “complete” nation a making for “colonization” e, the Romanian one had to generate elaborated propagandistic strategies strategies propagandistic elaborated generate to had one Romanian the e, 0

, New1919 , York,

n heritage in Dobruja that had to had that Dobruja in heritage n 181 ensation for the human losses in losses human the for ensation

culture in culture . Generally, the Romanian side was compensating the absence the compensating was side Romanian Generally,the .

Rmnas iiiig ok n h region” the in work civilizing “Romania’s

Cadrilater before 1913 by the the by 1913 before Cadrilater , Bucuresti, 1928, p 1928, Bucuresti, ,

“The Dobrogea” “The bruja”

p be claimed because without this this without because claimed be . 181 .

the war of 1877 of war the 180 - 187

h ato udrie the underlines author the

176 claims of having an an having of claims

178

familiar intonations intonations familiar edited by professor by edited

published almostpublished - 1878. 177 Bulgarian . 179

eriods eriods In theIn 46

CEU eTD Collection the country. imp had Party Liberal National the provinces, autonomous of making the of idea the favored power significant obtained had that country the in state. federative a creating of idea the supported Moldova) and Vaida Alexandru and Maniu Iuliu with Banat and Transylvania in Party National Romanian The assimilated. and integrated d 186 185 in published Stere by motives 184 183 Ț 182 in the to related propaganda and country, centralized highly a creating of that still was state”.the of institutions wit one parts, its legislative within one be should Romania unified that believing faithfully still am I and been have I because rights, provincial special reserving without unconditionally, it declared I unification, the wise who Maniu, Iuliu by expressed was autonomy, political alreadyemancipated couldachieve regions not any of“unity”. result desirable rule. foreign under had regions the about ideas the of several autonomy local and his sovereignty national of principles to referring state, federative expressed Stere Constantin views, Bratianu’s with organ Arguing administrative Romania. the concerning dispute the with coincided debate Dobrujan to of attempts active explains which politics, centralization Romanian the in domination Bratianu’s Ion - ărănesc, lui Iuliu Maniu la Camera in Patria,Cluj, 1919, p. p. 219 1919, Patria,Cluj, in Camera la Maniu lui Iuliu

Ibidem Ibidem “Dezbaterile Adunarii deputatilor, sesiunea ordinara 1919 ordinara sesiunea deputatilor, Adunarii “Dezbaterile achieve significant influence for a short period of time, failing in 1922. in failing time, of period short a for influence significant achieve “ Ioan neric d Cnttte nomt e eta e tdi Priuu Taranesc”, Partidului a studii de sectia de intocmit Constitutie de Anteproiect

Scurtu, Scurtu, The inevitable clash of two parties resulted in Romania allying with Entente in 1916 and and 1916 in Entente with allying Romania in resulted parties two of clash inevitable The h sm oiin mr rltd o a to related more opinion, same The

Bucure

. However, in 1919 the Peasant Party, opposing Bratia opposing Party, Peasant the 1919 in However, . i via Din ș ti, 1983, p 1983, ti, ț

pltc a Ro a politică a p 186

. 12 . "Viata Romaneasca", Bucuresti,1922, p Bucuresti,1922, Romaneasca", "Viata i is oenne on governance, its hin

Therefore, the main tendency of the Romanian state Romanian the of tendency main Therefore,the - 13 -

Voevod even before the union with the Old the with union the before even Voevod

184 âii (1926 mâniei

codn t See h at the Stere to According osed its doctrine oriented on high centralization of centralization high on oriented doctrine its osed - “ 1947) 1947)

ih o mr vlnay options voluntary more for wish wti is prt togt in thought spirit, its within e - – 1920, sedinta din 22 decembrie 1919” decembrie 22 din sedinta 1920,

tdu rtc rvn itra atdli Na Partidului istoria privind critic Studiu p . . 44 ly noted in 1919: “When I declared declared I “When 1919: in noted ly - 45 182 eps f ocd nfcto of unification forced of tempts

While one of the main parties main the of one While nu’s Liberal Party, managed managed Party, Liberal nu’s

with the expression of the the of expression the with

183 Kingdom (Wallachia Kingdom 185

C - building projectsbuilding

onsequently ”

l te public the all hn o actual to than

zto of ization in Expozeul Expozeul in tegration tegration ț ional , the , 47 -

CEU eTD Collection Facing the problem of the region’s non region’s the of problem the Facing state. the of regions the in policies the regarding opinions other of existence the admitted however, state, the by supported and regulated cases of majority the in was provinces the of maternal inlimba invatamant 188 instance.for in Dobruja, propaganda 187 d different from assistants several had and territory the in power administrative region). the within established was Tulcea sanjak vilayet the of part a made that Silistra sanjak the in included was it that notes Ibram Nuredin Administration. almost For homogeneous state. see be could that population Muslim numerous its and connected character facemultiethnic Bulgaria, withthe problemland’s thesame similarly, to had province. the in boundaries ethnic shift to need the was 1913 in again once emerge to had and Dobr Northern of inclusion the since Romania before appeared had that scopes the fa to order in also but Dobruja, was it as practice, countries. both i its of application the influencewithout full had have not in could propaganda the However, forming opinion public the at and side Bulgarian the from emigrants and anot or one supporting byprovince the destinyof the decide could who powers, foreign the at aimed propaganda cultural active introduce to had

s t a mnind previousl mentioned was it As Nuredin Ibram, Ibram, Nuredin

four of Rumeli with its center first in Edirne and then in Sofia (in the Tanzimat period Tanzimat the (in Sofia in then and Edirne in first center its with Rumeli of

Comunitatea musulmana din Dobrogea. Repere de viata spirituala. Viata religioasa si si religioasa Viata spirituala. viata de Repere Dobrogea. din musulmana Comunitatea

functioning 2 centuries, Dobruja remained a vilayet (province) under the Ottoman Ottoman the under (province) vilayet a remained Dobruja centuries,

Shifting ethnicalboundaries: homogenization p ,19 Constanta, , h Blain oenet i nt ae uh cnrl vr pro over control a such have not did government Bulgarian the y,

cilitate the creation of such of creation the cilitate not only in order to create the create to order in only not 98, p. p. 43 98, - homogeneous population, both Romania and Bulgaria and Romania both population, homogeneous

in region. the her party, at colonizers from the Romanian side side Romanian the from colonizers at party, her 188

h gvro, “sanjak governor, The n as an obstacle on the way to forming a forming to way the on obstacle an as n reality. One of the most important of important most the of One reality. image of Romanian or Bulgarian Bulgarian or Romanian of image

- e” xctd the executed bey” istricts, “kazas”. istricts, uja in 1878 1878 in uja rocesses 187 - Bulgarian Bulgarian

deas in deas which, 48

CEU eTD Collection writes: Bulgariaand Romania. states nationalemerged newly betweentwo minorityasqueezed into turned Muslims Dobrujan et privileged a From dramatically. changed roles non for tax land “ispence”(a the and head “cizye”(the payingthe to exposed was 1878 until Dobruja of population Christian The p. 36 2010, 192 19 Bucuresti, 191 190 189 Bulgaria. in 1879 of Constitution Turnovo the by and Romania in 1866 of Constitution the by defined were Muslims a in chosen judges the and muftis the upon trusted be will affairs family and Religious Christians. the of those like be just protected would family your faith, Your differences. religious and national recognize not does law cou the of “citizens” Muslim the addressed Romania of I Carol 14 the on Dobruja” of inhabitants the to “Proclamation his In tryingget they to part ridofthem make of if wishto didnot Romanian the into populations h strategies these of extreme more or in One genocide. or, cases, expulsion, exchanges, population through populations minority of rid get to try can it or culture; an rights, certain them grant minorities, of existence the recognize can it territory; its on minorities of existence the denying by homogeneity A ttempts at cultural homogenization can take various forms: a state can try to maintain the illusion of cultural cultural of illusion the maintain to try can state a forms: various take can homogenization cultural at ttempts

Йелис Ali Eminov, “ Ali Eminov, Ibidem G. Ilioniu, G. Ali Eminov in his text dedicated to the destinies of Turks and Tatars in the Balkans Balkans the in Tatars and Turks of destinies the to dedicated text his in Eminov Ali The case of Dobruja in 1878 in Dobruja of case The

Еролова

. 190 28, p. 608 p. 608 28, Cultele in Dobrogea in Cultele

Turks and Tartars in Bulgaria and the and Balkans” in Bulgaria Tartars and Turks , Добруджа - Bulgarian society, the case of the same province in 1913 in province same the of case the society, Bulgarian

192

d try to integrate them into society; it can try to assimilate minorities into the majority the into minorities assimilate to try can it society; into them integrate to try d

oh f h cntttos rne t te Tatar the to granted constitutions the of Both . Граници

quoted in C. Bratescu Bratescu C. in quoted

и crac wt yu law”. your with ccordance - -

1900 was the one of attempting to integrate the minorities minorities the integrate to attempting of one the was 1900 идентичности Muslims). ave been used by all Balkan states in dealing in states Balkan all by used been ave 189 “Cincizeci de ani de viata romaneasca” viata de ani de “Cincizeci hno

/ Ielis Erolova, Erolova, Ielis After the Russian the After -

Nationalities Papers Nationalities religious group of the Muslim Empire the Empire Muslim the of group religious the th

orj: odr ad identities and borders Dobruja: of November 1878 in Braila king Braila in 1878 November of Romanian national state. Romanian 191 ntry, saying that “the Romanian Romanian “the that saying ntry,

h rgt o te Dobrujan the of rights The - Turkish war, however, the however, war, Turkish , 28 (March 2000) p. 129 1, (March 2000) 28 , - uks pplto the population Turkish - 1940 was the was 1940 , Analele Dobrogei, Dobrogei, Analele , with their minority minority their with

one of one , Sofia, Sofia, , - tax) tax)

49 –

CEU eTD Collection including a great number of those from Dobruja, left Bulgaria by 1918. by by Bulgaria left Dobruja, that from those of number out great a including points Ierlova Ielis 1940. in division its finally, and, Romania by region whole the of occupation the Dobruja, Northern in Condominium the of rule B more Dobruja the official religionin turned ofthe state,a andinto “minority”. theMuslims with equal rights 196 memberscommunity. ofone as not did neighbors their that L Greek, the as well (as Romanian and Bulgarian The faith. Muslim its by defined simply or “Turkish” mostlyas whichviewed is population, Muslim ofthe structure theethnic on researches) 195 194 193 differentit from cases. similar made which province, the of character mixed extremely the in but itself, situation the of essence the or methods its in not expressed was Bulgaria by to opposed actively and Romania by held the homogeniza TheLipovans originalityof other minority. any possible and Jews, Tatars) and Turks (predominantly inhabitants in a In 1940. Bulgaria and Romania states, national neighboring two by shared territory homogeneous element Tatar and Turkish Muslim major a and population diverse strikingly rule. b introduced policies homogenization and government Romanian active the wars, Balkan the after province the were They Bulgaria. and Romania thanemigration werecomplex a more from into religious their thesuddenminority region turn i alkan wars and the annexation of Dobruja by Romania, the return of Cadrilater to Bulgaria, the the Bulgaria, to Cadrilater of return the Romania, by Dobruja of annexation the and wars alkan

F. Rossler, Schmidt Ibidem t hud e oe ta bfr 11 ther 1913 before that noted be should It Kellog, Kellog,

rm 93 te oiia stain i situation political the 1913, From orj hd to had Dobruja

ddition, the process of homogenization was not fully concentrated only on the Muslim Muslim the on only concentrated fully not was homogenization of process the ddition, The road to Romanian independence Romanian to road The Rumänien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach Rumänien those of the Romanians or Bulgarians. However, in both cases, Islam was no no was Islam cases, both in However, Bulgarians. or Romanians the of those

always belong to the same national group, but they primarily saw the Dobrujan Muslims Muslims Dobrujan the saw primarily they but group, national same the to belong always proceed a long way of nearly a century to turn from a place with a a with place a from turn to century a nearly of way long a proceed

dramatic change dramatic

connected w connected e did not exist any precise data (archival evidence or ethnographic ethnographic or evidence (archival data precise any exist not did e , Purdue University, West West University, , Purdue s in s te ein a changing was region the n 196

their lifestyles that had to be adapted to the new new the to adapted be to had that lifestyles their , Frankfurt am Mein, 1994, p 1994, amFrankfurt Mein, , ith the extremely unstable political situation in situation political unstable extremely the ith bt lo oue o Blain, Armenians, Bulgarians, on focused also but , ipovan etc) inhabitants of Dobruja knew knew Dobruja of inhabitants etc) ipovan Lafayette, 1995, p. 198 p. 1995, Lafayette, 84 0,0 Muslims, 100,000 1884 193 p

. 17 . rmtcly fe the after dramatically

The reasons for their for reasons The - 26 194

, 195 tion campaign tion

to a highly a to y the the y

50 n

CEU eTD Collection actual problem that made Fan Noli appeal abroad and develop a propaganda campaign very very tothesimilar Dobrujan oneBulgarian from the side. campaign propaganda a develop and abroad appeal Noli Fan made that problem actual ground grazing over feud a than more little affair “the from turned quickly Albania and Yugoslavia between Naum Saint of monastery the over debate Greece. and Yugoslavia with disputes the into engaged was state homogeneous in the political struggle”. role important an play would revision for “eager that ensuring concerns” geopolitical of product Alban to Similarly 201 200 199 the and Greek 1920 beginningof 198 197 affirms She well. as as grasped be could that everything foreign. out pressing were who authorities, omnipresent the of supervision the under happening was Romania in like process, homogenization the character: out points Karakasidou Dobruja. Romanian or Macedonia Greek in ones the to compared be hardly can they although processes, Albanian the feat In material, more propaganda much a published producing and territory significant the of division the in resulted and decades 3 almost of favor in Naum aband to decided finally who Zogu, king and Pasic between Serbian”. already was which territory surrender to consented which survive could government Serbian “no that Naum

Greek the on details further For Karakasidou p. 87 cit, op. C, Robert Austin, in Ninciccited 85 p. cit, Austin,op. Austin, While Yugoslav foreign minister Nincic would remark on the possibility of possibility the on remark would Nincic minister foreign Yugoslav While 201 Founding a Balkan state, state, Balkan a Founding

Karakasi ., Fields of wheat, hills of blood of hills wheat, of Fields - Yugoslav case the contested land, however, was also subject to homogenization homogenization to subject also was however, land, contested the case Yugoslav ia in 1912 in ia

the dou also notes one very one notes also dou

invoked was that entity abstract an “largely was Hellenes of nation the that 200 ilge ih uolva Te Romanian The Yugoslavia. with dialogue 197

The final result of the dispute was achieved through the negotiations the through achieved was dispute the of result final The

- In the 20s economically weak Albania, being on its wa economicallyweak onits In being the20s Albania, Albanian protocol of Kapestitsa, of May protocol Albanian -

1913 and then in the 20s, Bulgaria had the borders that “were the the “were that borders the had Bulgaria 20s, the in then and 1913 - Toronto, 2012, p. 14 2012, Toronto, Albanian border conflicts see Basil, Basil, see conflicts border Albanian

that after 1912 the presence of Greece had the official official the had Greece of presence the 1912 after that ,

Chicago, 1997, p. 162 p. Chicago,1997,

essential

uring a larger number of participants. participants. of number larger a uring

feature that has its importance for Dobruja for importance its has that feature with no political overtones’ political no with

28 th , 1920”, 1920”, , on claims to Vermosh and Saint Saint and Vermosh to claims on Kondis - ugra dsue atd for lasted dispute Bulgarian

Balkanstudies “The Albanian question at the the at question Albanian “The 198

199 y a tobuilding 20, no. 2, 1979 no. 20, The territorial The

ceding Saint Saint ceding

to the most the to 51

CEU eTD Collection undermining the Romanian program of the integration of the region. The texts generally reflect reflect generally texts The region. the of integration the of program Romanian the undermining inter Romanian was which side, Bulgarian the the from reaction a find did homogenization addition, of attempts In texts. in criticize and describe only could Bulgaria technologies to opportunity an andthe village”. policemen posted to collectors, tax administrators, civil of form the in embodied residents, area to existence concrete celebrations” holiday schools, flags, through symbolized and 206 205 next chapter. 204 203 202 was population local the rob to hand free a whom to exiled, being were misdeeds of guilty Vasile to again referring col a into turned Dobruja, was “Dobroudja wrote: who Kogalniceanu, in Bulgarians of oppressions Romanian the described border. state Romania’s for land of piece dangerous politically even and abs an as province the viewing Romania, of part being Dobruja of idea the of approve not did 1878, in father his to opposite who, Kogalniceanu, Mihail of son Kogalniceanu, l the integrate to attempts and frontier Dobrujan the with satisfied be to inability Romania’s of result the were they that explaining 1913, after Dobruja with dealing in fails Romanian the to referred published inRomanian,although many may oftheor aFrench texts also have German aversion. English, the while that noted be Iton thesuccessesthe criticismRomanians. made expressed byand Bulgarians reports by should

Vasile Milan Ibidem Ibidem The thorough analysis of th of analysis thorough The n ta hd ee be Romanian. been never had that and Unlike Bulgaria that lost Dobruja once again after the treaty of Bucharest, Romania had Romania Bucharest, of treaty the after again once Dobruja lost that Bulgaria Unlike Milan Markov, one of the prominent the of one Markov, Milan

Markov, Markov,

Kogalniceanu Kogalniceanu , op. cit, p. 163 p. cit, op. ,

French or German and less often less and German or French

The

political fate of Dobroudja after the Berlin congress the after Dobroudja of fate political establish a state control that allowed the country to put into practice the the practice into put to country the allowed that control state a establish Dobrogea 1879 Dobrogea

e texts and their arguments related concretely to territorial claims is to be found in the the in found be to is claims territorial to concretely related arguments their and texts e igr at f h well the of part bigger

- 1909, drepturi polit drepturi 1909, 203

205

in Bulgarian, the Romanian analogues are generally are analogues Romanian the Bulgarian, in

h ato as apae t te pno o Vasile of opinion the to appealed also author The Bulgarian voices in the territorial dispute primarily primarily dispute territorial the in voices Bulgarian ice fara libertati, ice fara - spread

p ro ony in which the officials who were were who officials the which in ony - , Sofia, 1919, 10 p. Sofia,1919, , ugra texts Bulgarian 202

Bucuresti, 1910 Bucuresti, wie te state “the while , 206 olutelyunnecessary

akv explicitly Markov 204

r witn in written are a a very a had ested in ested 52

CEU eTD Collection allow the uncultivated deserted lands to become fertile once again. once fertile become to lands deserted uncultivated the allow prese 1929 in published coloniza of policy Romania’s of successes landscapeforce, apparentlyexpected which results. by bring the didnot hold to inability Romania’s out point given”. 210 209 Ischirkoff 208 207 local the of eyes the in region the in policy the of reasonabilitythe of justification the and it hold we sides both main two The mentioned. texts the of several from coming propaganda the for role successesan regionthe in presence Bulgarian or Romanian of representation of way another existed there one, other the diminishing and side one favoring census, the of corrupted. be easily could information the that the on rely to be impossible already has it almost as sides, both seems from data demographical it aspect this in Generally, Dobruja. of masters local Turks and Tatars. the to similarly “minorities” as them featuring settlers, Bulgarian of history the to text omi not did author

Ibidem,pp. Culea Markov See Penacoff See 207 Romanian authors demonstrated an opposite approach to the problem presenting the the presenting problem the to approach opposite an demonstrated authors Romanian , crucial most the play not did Dobruja in affairs of state real the that noted be should It no were they authors Bulgarian the of eyes the in Definitely, , Cat trebuie trebuie Cat , op. cit, p. p. 18 cit, op. , Les bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique et ethnographiq historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Lesbulgares

Very similar ideas we ideas similar Very 150 d their presentation to thepublic,mainly to Romaniand their case. presentation tothe foreignone inthe

re the attraction of the Great the of attraction the re , - Le problem de la Dobroudja de Sud. Un aspect eco aspect Un Sud. de Dobroudja la de problem Le 163 210 sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa

t the presence of Bulgarians in the region. He dedicated several parts of the the of parts several dedicated He region. the in Bulgarians of presence the t

nted the colonization of the province the of colonization the nted

re expressed by Ischirkoff and Penakov, both of whom tried to tried whom of both Penakov, and Ischirkoff by expressed re Dobruja because of the attempts to alter its demographical its alter to attempts the of because Dobruja

Powers in order either to gain the territory back or to or back territory the gain to either order in Powers ,

tion. Apostol Culea in his book about Dobruja Dobruja about book his in Culea Apostol tion. Bucuresti, 1928, p. p. 209 1928, Bucuresti,

Except for the possibilities of altering the results the altering of possibilities the for Except en mentioned in the previous previous the in mentioned en nomique et social de ce problem ce de social et nomique ue

as a benevolent factor that could that factor benevolent a as ,

– Berne, 1 Berne,

the description of the achieved the of description the 209

t the “minorities”, but the but “minorities”, the t It should be noted that the that noted be should It 208 919

scopes from from scopes , Paris, 1928, Paris, , chapter chapter

CEU eTD Collection contest of powers, being transformed into a subject ofinternationaltransformedcontest being ofpowers, relations. intoasubject regional simple of borders the beyond goes and part Northern its only not Dobruja, of whole the conti a or affirmed be could nation a which on land the for competition simple a than complicated more be to out turns situation the however, side, Romanian the by Dobruja holding and occupying for pretexts possi and successes general The public. se and concepts the of understanding chapter. clearer the For part. current the in 213 212 p. 22 munte,1910, Valenii de 211 Bulgarian historiography. works published the in reflection the of one be to appears reality and propaganda of clash the of idea The activities. their of outcomes and reasons particip the of texts several through seen dispute, Dobrujan the of collide and together watch and audiences local perceiving two elites, also but Bulgaria, Greater nation and state

The two following two The Кузманова Iorga, “ Iorga,

Dobru Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianuar 1910 de Nicolae Iorga, Nicolae de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce

От ja after 1913 became a land where not only Romanian and Bulgarian competing Bulgarian and Romanian only not where land a became 1913 after ja

Ньой - ulig projects building m chapters of the thesis analyze and investigate the mentioned aspects of the dispute not touched touched not dispute the of aspects mentioned the investigate and analyze thesis the of chapters nuation of the debate of 1878. The Dobrujan dispute of 1913 of dispute Dobrujan The 1878. of debate the of nuation ain motives that describe the general course of the debate that first finds its finds first that debate the of course general the describe that motives ain d

до . 213

Крайова

These factors being driven all together present the complicated picture complicated the present together all driven being factors These

place a

/ Kuzmanova,

of the contemporaries and later continues in the Romanian and Romanian the in continues later and contemporaries the of

lse ad h ie o Greater of idea the and clashed hr to optn mdriain rjcs to argu two projects, modernization competing two where l “xasos o te future” the for “expansions ble From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From n ad cig oeg pwr ca powers foreign acting and ing odr sourc condary , Sofia,1989 ,

Romania faced the idea of of idea the faced Romania ants of the debate and the the and debate the of ants

211 s sd ee t te first the to refer used es 212

a b vee as viewed be can

- 1940 embraces embraces 1940 me along along me ing 54 ,

CEU eTD Collection moral and material help to the Dobrujans and actions following the way of political intervention political of way the following actions and Dobrujans the to help material and moral Dobruja” “enslaved in Bulgarians of aims The territory. the of part Southern Dob over control theof annexation the to Bulgarianside the reactionsfrom the of one established as created brotherhood”was had Romania after 1914, In 2009. ( 216 p 215 историята 214 propagandistic Romanian the to resistance the were objectives these Among land. the over rights important several “Dobrujan accomplishing in help the with associated to had that texts generating of individuals process the in engaged people the the became quickly brotherhood” as well as organizations, revolutionary their to according acted and government Bulgarian the on dependent directly not were organizations the cases many in Bulg however, cause, Bulgarian the the supporting materials sustain the of did distribution and creation state the encourage did the and organizations part, previous the in mentioned was ofpossibilities.province Bulgarianlimits and the one the strengthen within propaganda a generally Romania, to transition complete its since region the in active organizations revolutionary Bulgarian of preservation the scho Dobruja”, “enslaved in situation the of improvement the for ВДРО Chapter III. Chapter III. p

. 341 . See « o frhr eal see details further For Устав ols, political and religious freedoms. religious and political ols,

) - Милачков

407 1923 The Bulgarian propaganda campaign can hardly be seen as a complete state project. As it it As project. state complete a as seen be hardly can campaign propaganda Bulgarian The

на

- братство

Добруджа 1940 1940 /Milachkov /Milachkov г The Dobrujan dispute 1913 dispute Dobrujan The /The Internal Dobrujan re Dobrujan Internal /The

Добруджа

the territory , - София oriented society that attempted to weaken the Ro the weaken to attempted that society oriented Л in in . Нягулов Златев , 1992/ 1992/ , »/”The regulations of the Dobruja brotherhood”, Dobruja the of regulations »/”The

L , and their unification with the Bulgarians from “free Bulgaria”, “freefrom Bulgarians the with unification their and , Sourc История Zlatev,

and creating propaganda creating and es about the history of Dobruja of thehistory es about

volutionar 214 goals Bulgaria had in Dobruja in order to justify its its justify to order in Dobruja in had Bulgaria goals

the

Вътрешната на The “Dobruja brotherhood”, unlike the Bulgarian the unlike brotherhood”, “Dobruja The

Добруджа society were simple: the cultural support of the of support cultural the simple: were society

y organization (VDRO) 1923 (VDRO) organization y

w interests. own

/ - Njagulov добруджанска 1940: claiming rights over rightsover claiming 1940: ua te so the ruja, The history of Dobruja of history The ,

Sofia, 1992, p Sofia,1992, 216

1914, published in published 1914, революционна

manian position in the the in position manian . h mmes f the of members The -

1940

arian revolutionary revolutionary arian p - ald “Dobruja called , 242 .

Русе -

243 , 2009/ , , Sofia, 2007, Sofia, , организация Извори

215

Ruse, Ruse,

was

55 за

CEU eTD Collection h trioy ihn h bres f “nfe an “unified a of borders the within territory the preserving and control under region the keeping at aimed mainly was propaganda Romanian the therefore neighbor, its than region the “colonize” and “assimilate” to possibilities and time more Ro Neuilly, of treaty the to according 1919 in back it getting and 1916 in territory oriented inh pro and solidarity the of stimulation the machine, 218 Sofia,1917. ed. izd. us” for done be to want we something them Мавродиевъ for do will and Bulgarians the towards honest be ethnic will to we according later, or “Sooner Universul: in t have we’ll 1914 principles, in writing Dobruja, Southern of se annexation details, Romania’s further For province. acquired newly the towards Zeletin attitudes Romanian the of approve not did Zeletin, Stefan general, in policies Romanian the of critic another Kogalniceanu, Vasile for Except 1910. Bucuresti, Vasile see details further For presented. was 217 s of works written the address rather would produced; rela in only seen is dispute the of participants the of role The Dobruja. in legacies religious the of presentation and origin of concepts identity, national factor, linguistic th of participants propaganda the territorialreached continuingtogrow peak, dispute. into its a more regarded was 1878 in that Dobruja possessing of importance extreme the in audience foreign the as well as internal the convince to also but region, the in legacy Romanian the of legitimacy the opinions expressing actively were them actors. public Romanian the all by shared not the was government of Romanian policy the of success ultimate an presenting Dobruja with Romania unified perfectly

Кузманова In the previous chapter, the opinion of Vasile Kogalniceanu regarding Dobruja and its Romanian administration administration Romanian its and Dobruja regarding Kogalniceanu Vasile of opinion the chapter, previous the In , Din tara magarilor.Insemnari tara Din a ufi ecag fr uh oe oain Bessarabia. Romanian more much for exchange unfair an s The Romanian party by 1913 found itself in different conditions. Although losing the the losing Although conditions. different in itself found 1913 by party Romanian The h current The

hence , abitants of the regionabitantsattraction offoreign ofthe andtheBulgarian side. attention tothe , Доброджа От

, Ньой

dbt, hi mtos f nepeig itr o te ein rfrig o the to referring region, the of history interpreting of methods their debate, e for the perception of the Dobrujan case of claiming rights over the territory one one territory the over rights claiming of case Dobrujan the perceptionof the for

o give Cadrilater that we have taken after the Bucharest peace treaty, back to Bulgaria so that that so Bulgaria to back treaty, peace Bucharest the after taken have we that Cadrilater give o

chapter deals closely with the analysis of the texts produced by the the by produced texts the of analysis the with closely deals chapter до : критически

Крайова

/ Kuzmanova, / Kuzmanova, ,

Bucuresti, 1998, p. 54 Publicist Foru would also express opinions against against opinions express also would Foru Publicist 54 p. 1998, Bucuresti, етюдъ Kogalniceanu

, supporting the Romanian cause, trying to to trying cause, Romanian the supporting

София From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From vrl eetd uhr ta udrae a undertake than authors selected everal , 1917/ , , - Bulgarian feelings among the non the among feelings Bulgarian Dobrogea 1879 Dobrogea hmgnos cuty Te da of idea The country. homogeneous” d

M,Mavrodiev, ,

- Sofia, 1989, Sofia,1989, 190

Dobrodzha; critical etude critical Dobrodzha; 9, d 9, 218

tion to the texts they had had they texts the to tion repturi politice fara libertati fara politice repturi y 93 te Romanian the 1913, By

p 217 p. 18 p.

h mjrt of majority The - 19 mania still had still mania not only prove only not

- Romanian Romanian

thorough thorough , 2. dopu 2. , –

e Stefan Stefan e from

the the 56 М l. ,

CEU eTD Collection the case the appurtenance ofDobruja. of in propaganda Bulgarian and Romanian the reflect that texts of selection the on mostly focused the of personalities the of analysis 219 of types several targeted generally authors The region. the in legacy Romanian or the justifying annexation Romanian the of illegitimacy the proving Bulgaria, to Dobruja back bringing and origins different very of individuals these all between Vladescu. of case the in as painters or philosophers poets, even sometimes and historians journalists, writers, diplomats, the but politicians, the not were often dispu Dobrujan the of voices The backgrounds. their of diversity the underline should witness andhappening evaluate thechanges. particip the offers time as sides both for interpret to easy and evident more become that region the of administration Romanian the of the fails or is successes passing years with witnessed be can that progress important only The another. one of creat and land the over rights justifying and claiming of patterns unaltered, same the following remains rhetoric Their time. with significantly change not do texts the of authors of duration the of division The sides. both of view of point the from causes the of one presenting voices of number a featuring decades, almost three for Bulgaria and lasted The between dispute Dobrujan Romania

See , Christian , M Exploring the roles of the public actors, whose texts are used in the current thesis, one thesis, current the in used are texts whose actors, public the of roles the Exploring

Vla the dispute in periods seems to be unnecessary, as the arguments used by the the by used arguments the as unnecessary, be to seems periods in dispute the descu..

Exploring the rolesof the participants: the voices Bulgarii: memorile unui ofit unui memorile Bulgarii:

individualsin the making of the dispute public actors, who created them. Therefore, the current part is part current the Therefore, them. created who actors, public

er roma er n fost prizonier i prizonier fost n destinies was their direct interest in interest direct their was destinies ns f h dbts osblte to possibilities debates the of ants 219

n Bulgaria n h mi budn link bounding main The . Bucures .

ing images images ing ti, 1926. ti,

te very very te of

CEU eTD Collection supporting one of the parties. the of one supporting preserve and gain could Bulgaria nor Romania, neither as parties the of one to support grant could side one. international the was previously, mentioned was it as audience, important most the and first The past experiencescurrent positions. and vie their presented and audiences Lausanne 225 224 congress Berlin 223 see case, adnotata bibliografie Iorga: Nicolae Iorga’s on details For introduction. the of p.7 see Bulgarian, in “ 222 221 220 a and stories by entertained more be could that one numerous more the and intellectual less the French, wo propagandistic historical the reading in interested be would that people educated of strata narrow very the was debate the of participants the by seen audience”as to want would or could who people of consisted definitely“public” This opinion. public a create to narrowlocaleducated public. layerof t to evidently, oriented and,English in written are America, leagueof national Romanian the instance, for or, Bulgaria in organization Dobruja the by published works versions the two cases in the of have majority Mutafchiev and Iorga like historians by published texts the editions, periodical local the in Bulgarian in or Romanian in write to decision logical a be to seems it While authors. Добруджа

See Schmidt is reg the debate in sides taking powers foreign ofprocessthe The See Stoica Stoica See o isac, see instance, For ed h txs h hsoin, ilmt o junlss a gnrtd Hne te “local the Hence, generated. had journalists or diplomats historians, the texts the read Petrescu 220 I

orga. orga. However, the local audience had to play its own role in the eyes of the authors, who had who authors, the of eyes the in role own its play to had audience local the However, 224 The possibilities of attracti of possibilities The - Paris, 1918 Paris, - h woe ein ihu Great without region whole the

Ro -

or Nicolae Petrescu Nicolae or Comnen в Droits nationaux et politiques des Roumains dans la Dobroudja. la dans Roumains des et politiques Droitsnationaux

(ed.), (ed.), миналото sler, , Sofia,1919. ,

Ruma The Dobrogea The

, Mutafciev

a orga Dboda: sa hsoiu, cnmqe ehorpiu e politique et ethnographique économique, historique, essai (Dobroudja): Dobrogea La

: nien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg Ersten dem nach nien Българи

Bulga

, New York, 1919 and and 1919 York, New , 221 и

s Румуни Comnen’s political essays. political Comnen’s icomentata

This fact can explain the choice of the language by some of the of some by language the of choice the explain can fact This e e ruans as e itie u as danubiennes pays du histoire le dans roumaines set re ws from rather different angles that were determined by their their by determined were that angles different rather from ws ng the foreign public foreign the ng – 223

в h BlainRmna oe n te rnh one. French the and one Bulgarian/Romanian the

историята

, Constant ,

Powers maintaining a sort of balance in the region region the in balance of sort a maintaining Powers , Frankfurt am Main, 1994, p 1994, amFrankfurt Main, , Milan Markov, Markov, Milan

a, 1998. a, на

дунавските

arded in the fourth in the arded opinion to opinion 225

The second type of the audience is audience the of type second The The political fate of Dobr of fate political The Gelu

земи

Bucharest 1918 Bucharest

, Culicea, rks of Iorga, often written in in written often Iorga, of rks

София the Romanian or Bulgarian or Romanian the he foreign audience and the the andaudience foreignhe p

. 40 . chapter. chapter. , 1999 1999 ,

Dobrogea i Dobrogea - 69

–

. the original text is is text theoriginal

Sofia, 1932 and and 1932 Sofia, oudja after the the after oudja n lucra n 222 rile lui lui rile

The 58 ,

CEU eTD Collection o hm a te ie ulc f Dobr of public wide the as them, to attitude any had peasantry the if out find to impossible almost is It audience. local educated the story simple more a in written newspapersbooks localor in bypublished articlesattracted be to hadBulgaria) and Romania between debates political the in interested less much apparently, (and, circle wider his region’s the of vision simplistic Marcoff Frenchas 228 227 ofit 226 or Bulgarian know not Romanian, toread them. did who opponents, the allowing English in or work French the in of published many as exist, did participants the between dialogue the that claim may remar the as texts, propagandistic Bulgarian and criminal as of Dobruja,depicting it administration RomanianKogalniceanu’s the Mihail of criticizeviews openly would Markov Milan instance, For participants. Romanian the by expressed affirmations Bulgarianworks the when supporting cause several in evident becomes aspect This confrontations. personal avoiding directly, not although grasp their works. different very for readers, write to attempted clearly example, for Culea, and Vladescu target. main authors the of possibility the th admit to appealing still should One economic. generally were audience this influencing of Methods pamphlets. or researches historical writing by opinions their express

Vla See erroma Markov, descu, Culea, Culea, The texts that are presented in the current chapter mainly address to the international or international the to address mainly chapter current the in presented are that texts The It should be noted that the participant of the debates also seem to address each other, other, each address to seem also debates the of participant the that noted be should It 227 n fost prizonier in Bulgaria in prizonier fost n

h pltcl ae f Dobr of fate political The however, it is hard to affirm that they were read by those, whom they had they whom those, by read were they that affirm to hard is it however, Bulgarii: memorile unui ofit unui memorile Bulgarii: - Cat trebuie trebuie Cat

telling manner. telling outrageous. e law e , Milan, ,

educated people; however, it becomes clear that this audience was not the not was audience this that clear becomes it however, people; educated Le sort politique de la Dobroudjaapres le Congres de Berlin de Congres le Dobroudjaapres la de sort politique Le sa stie oricine despre despre oricine stie sa

228 226

h Romanian The

. Bucures . uj atr h Bri congres Berlin the after oudja erroma tory and tory jn peasants, ujan ti, 1926 ti, n fost prizonier in Bulgaria in prizonier fost n Dobrogea

authors present contra authors the the

ks related to them are more are them to related ks ie hwvr ses o be to seems however, side,

Romanian , Bucuresti, 1928 or or 1928 Bucuresti, ,

ihre o Aoain settler Aromanian or fishermen

or Bulgarian or s ,

oi, 97 p 1917, Sofia, . Bucures . - arguments arguing against the Vla descu

ti, 1926. ti, rights over it. This much much This it. over rights ,

Sofia,1917 rare. Nevertheless, one one Nevertheless, rare. p

20 . es neetd n the in interested less .

Bulgarii: memorile unui unui memorile Bulgarii: -

23, also published in in published also 23,

expected toexpected s did not not did s s were were s 59

CEU eTD Collection peasant origins, while in Romania the boyar element was much stronger in the formation of the of formation the in stronger much was element boyar the Romania in while origins, peasant However, peasants. being from far were themselves authors the population, peasant local the by retold tales oral for authority independent them, of all however, significantly; differed participants the of influence of level the as well as background pu of mechanism the through audience the to access having individuals educated rather be to seem sides both from authors of majority The Constant 229 the of rights political and “National and Dobruja?” in represent we do “What used: are Romanian acknowledged internationally and historian famous most the of one being Iorga Nicolae techniques tobeinvestigated. are of thetexts to have texts the of authors the about facts significant well were Mutafchiev or Ishirkov Iorga, like personalities However, inexistent. practically or limited often is destinies and them about information the individuals, eminent were debate the of participants the ofall not As line. Romanian official the support not did but authority, definite possessed Ionescu or mention exceptions several with national scope propagandistic their same the of following all level were they the differed, influence Although international Dobruja. of question the regarding propaganda au the of opinion the of creation the in elite.

o frhr eal see details further For

The authors, whose texts are used in the current thesis, are active public actors, engaged engaged actors, public active are thesis, current the in used are texts whose authors, The a, 1998 a, s

had a number of works dedicated to Dobruja. to dedicated works of number a had

their texts to appear. Although occasionally they could use the memoirs, diaries or or diaries memoirs, the use could they occasionally Although appear. to texts their

it should be underlined that underlined be should it

- Culicea known and important not only in relation to the case of Dobruja, hence hence Dobruja, of case the to relation in only not important and known ly ed previously, who, like Vasile Kogalniceanu, Stefan Zeletin or Take or Zeletin Stefan Kogalniceanu, Vasile like who, previously, ed

. from their occupation or past activities, had enough weight or or weight enough had activities, past or occupation their from

orga i Dobrogea lucra n ine wie uprig h Rmna o Bulgarian or Romanian the supporting while diences blishing their texts. It should be underlined that the the that underlined be should It texts. their blishing

ie u Ncle og: ilorfe adnotata bibliografie Iorga: Nicolae lui rile the representatives of the Bu the of representatives the 229

be mentioned before the propaganda propaganda the before mentioned be In the current thesis, two of two thesis, current the In lgarian elite were of of were elite lgarian

s comentat i

his works his

their their 60 a ,

CEU eTD Collection origin oftheRomanian pe demolishes almost he historian. Romanian Iorg of colleague Bulgarian famous Mutafchiev, re and interprets historian, a as he that history Romanian of context general the into Dobruja include to attempts authors becausehe but words, author’sthe weigh generalof becausethe of Dobruja”. in Romanians 235 234 Иширков 233 1999/ 232 Todor 231 1910 Iorga, Nicolae de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam 230 “Romania of circle destinies the regarding interest socialist the of member a muncitoare”/”Working became he where Bucharest, in education who received hishigher Kostence), (or inConstanta a and Ivan historian, born a Penakov, lawyer Peace C T Peace the of signing the during Bucharest Bulgarian the of member a was languages, foreign six than more spoke Ishirkov acade an also an and Being ethnographer one. and political geographer and Bulgarian ethnographic important the to also but dispute, the of side historical the

Сп introduction. the Ibidem.See For furthe For See o frhr eal aot sikvs igah ad rfsinl aaiiis see capabilities professional and biography Ishirkov’s about details further For Mutafchiev, Mutafchiev,

Dobruja in the past: Bulgarians and Romanians in the history of the Danubian lands Danubian the of the history in Romanians and Bulgarians the past: in Dobruja . „ .

Popnedelev Исторически Iorga. Iorga. oee, h pro ms cl most person the However, to only not refers side, Bulgarian the of representative eminent another Ishirkov, Anastas onference. , София r details see details r ris ainu e pltqe ds omis as a Dobroudja. la dans Roumains des politiques et nationaux Droits Добруджа , 1987/ , ,

Professor Peta Professor

234 преглед 231

Ignat Penkov, Ignat

Тодор

Iorga’s ideas of Romanian rights over Dobruja on the basis of the Roman Roman the of basis the on Dobruja over rights Romanian of ideas Iorga’s

In his “Bulgarians and Romanians in the history of the Danu the of history the in Romanians and “Bulgarians his In

Romania”. 230 в “, 1971 1971 “, ople.

миналото Iorga’s focus becomes extremely important for this chapter not only not chapter this for important extremely becomes focus Iorga’s Попнеделев r Mutafchiev, known and and unknown known rMutafchiev, -

creates. Similar acknowledgements can be made about Petar Petar about made be can acknowledgements Similar creates. 232 г Anastas Ish Anastas .,

the кн 235 : . 3, 3, . osely and personally connected to the Dobrujan case was was case Dobrujan the to connected personally and osely Българи

Bulgarians in Dobruja and Bessarabia. It should be noted be should It Bessarabia. and Dobruja in Bulgarians Професор eao epesd emnn cnen n scientific and concern permanent expressed Penakov с . . 150 irkov reaty of 1913 and wr and 1913 of reaty

- и 151

, Sofia, 1987 Sofia,1987 ,

Румуни Петър a, who openly opposed to the arguments of the of arguments the to opposed openly who a,

Мутафчиев в

, Sofia,1997 ,

историята ote a memorandum for the Paris the for memorandum a ote , , unlike many other Romanian unlike manyRomanian other, познат

на

i ad professor, a and mic Bucharest 1918, 1918, Bucharest дунавските

и Игнат

непознат , Sofia,1999. ,

Пенков , Valenii de munte, munte, Valenii de ,

delegation in delegation , земи София bian lands” bian

, Iorga , Анастас

София , 1997/ , “ , 233 61 Ce ,

CEU eTD Collection arechapter. analyzed inthe Markov Milan Sofia of Academy Military the in science social of professor and jurist Gabe, Petar Gabe, Dora poetess Bulgarian and historian writer famous Ishirkov, Chilingirov, Stilijan ethnographer mentioned already were them Among expedition. Penakov of member a was Penakov that 242 241 240 239 238 издирва 237 Sofia,1994 IInd edition, Petrov, Petar prof. editor and Compiler scholars. other universityand проф. редактор 236 very colleagues Bulgarian his of works similar with book his of comparison a find may one simila uses and view of point same the demonstrates still it data, with filled ethnographer. and elaborated more much andbe to seems work his historian Although sociologist, a was Seisanu Romulus voice, Romanian eminent diplomatic and publicist historical, with compatriots his by used ideas the to however, referring, story, a as history retelling of manner his of view while editing “TheDobrogea” justifying publication rights Romania’s Sto Vasile him, Dobruja. of administration the on views Romania’s summarizes generally thesis usedinthe that is text affairs His of Romania. laterforeign minister and of politician was a jurist, Petrescu Nicolae people. educated highly mainly but different, rather were opponents,

Romulus Romulus See Stoica Nicolae ofMil thecover See e hs ao work major his See See Culea,

ния ача кпдця Дбуж, 97 г. 1917 Добруджа, в експедиция Научна Apostol D. Culea was a wr a was Culea D. Apostol the of participants The

(ed.), (ed.), te esnlte, hs et aeiprat o h urn tei, ok ati the in part took thesis, current the for important are texts whose personalities, other ,

Petrescu )” )” Seisanu, Seisanu, Cat trebuie sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre oricine stie sa trebuie Cat София TheD

еъ Петров Петър ica, a renowned publicist and publicist renowned a ica, - Comnen, Comnen, Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, , 1917/ , obrogea an Markov’s work: Marcoff Markov’s an

Стилиянъ

Stilijan , , New1919 York, L a Dobrogea a ,

II ид, ои. 199 София. изд., .

Ч Chilingirov, Chilingirov, илингировъ debate from the Romanian side, similarly to their Bulgarian Bulgarian their to similarly side, Romanian the from debate the the 238 237 iter and his propagandistic book propagandistic his and iter

cetfc xeiin n orj n 1917. in Dobruja in expedition scientific historian Vasil Zlatarski, publicist and fathe and publicist Zlatarski, Vasil historian and a number of other important personalities, whose texts whose personalities, important other of number a and

Paris

r rhetoric. r Dobruja and our revival and Dobruja ,

, , 1918 Bulgaria’s Bulgaria’s Добруджа олд н уиесттк и рг уеи Ссаие и Съставител учени. други и университетски на Доклади diplomat also became part of the Dobrujan dispute dispute Dobrujan the of part became also diplomat 4/

,1928 Bucuresti, Scientific 242

historical rights over Dobrudja over rights historical

Taking into account Seisanu’s occupation, Seisanu’s account into Taking , Bucuresti, 1928 Bucuresti, , и

нашето

background. expedition , Sofia,1917 ,

възраждане

is important from the point of point the from important is in

241

Dobruja over theland. over

nie ue, another Culea, Unlike

( , 1917. 1917. , културно

236 , Bern, 1918 Bern, , r of the famous the of r 239

oehr with Together 240

Reports of the the of Reports Similarly to Similarly - исторически

- Comnen Comnen

CEU eTD Collection the analysis of propaganda; however, the knowledge of professions and backgrounds of the the of backgrounds and professions of knowledge the however, propaganda; of analysis the the all featuring Bulgarians. memoirs wrote Romania to return his after and 1916 in Bulgarians by imprisoned was who Vladescu, painter as personalities such found be Romanian and Bulg the by applied methods the between differences of insignificance the proof to order in useful 244 243 question matter muchm text the of analysis the for audience, possible the targeting for also useful very be may author the of occupation the and name the although chai propagandistic same the of part make still thesewithin categories groups in authors the of arrangements these Although appurtenance. region’s the of idea the got have would reader the which of out tale, a create to attempted who Culea, and Gabe Vladescu, like personalities of consists “storytellers” events. of version their prove to order in facts “brightest” the out picking pamphlets, concessive very and influential mainly wrote Stoica, and Markov like advocates, The h grounded categories. o Therefore, dispute. the in involved impress an gives debate the of participants

See Vla descu, Christian M.. Christian descu, “ a Dobroudja meridionale. e Quadrilatere”, e meridionale. Dobroudja “ a It should be noted that among the Romanian intellectuals engaged in the debate, there can can debate,there the in engagedintellectuals Romanian the among that noted be It should Some of the texts used do not even have a name of the author on them. However, they they However, them. on author the of name a have even not do used texts the of Some well a generated have to claimed Mutafchiev and Ishirkov Iorga, like scholars, The

243 istorical basis that supported the Romanian and Bulgarian rights over the territory. territory. the over rights Bulgarian and Romanian the supported that basis istorical

The personality of the painter himself does not present a special importance for importance special a present not does himself painter the of personality The arian side. arian

, they tobeperceived. thedispute easier make Bulgarii: memorile unui ofit unui memorile Bulgarii: ore.

e a dvd te raos f h txs n he relative three in texts the of creators the divide can ne ion of their possible objectives and reasons for for reasons and objectives possible their of ion

are very fluid, as not all the texts can be defined be can texts the all not as fluid, very are Paris, 1919 Paris, erroma s n of works, not becoming exceptions. becoming not works, of n

h apoce o te uhr t te Dobrujan the to authors the of approaches the n fost prizoni fost n

er in Bulgaria er in

possible negative traits of of traits negative possible

. . Bucures

The last group, the the group, last The ti, 1926, p. p. 5 1926, ti, 244

Hence, being being

63 -

CEU eTD Collection well and legitimate claims Bulgaria’s or Romania’s proving While sides. both by applied arguments or Romanian the support to using Bulgar were authors the mechanisms the perceive to order In p munte,1910, Valenii de 245 author The history. Dobrujan manifest ourselves inDobruja”. si we civilization, of elements first the them granting Balkan), the also (meaning parts those all in living was that nation oldest the of representatives the culture”…”as pastoral our Thraci the “From of: theRomanianspart make “civilization” ofthe addressingIorga tothe idea wrote, already 1910 in Dobruja?” in represent we do “What his In complicated. more is view Iorga’s however, century, of heritage” foc mainly were claims side’s Romanian The basis. same the having pattern same the preserved always it interpretations, several Having Dobruja. over right historical the of the territorial dispute. participants the of works the in reflected propaganda the of whole the up build that aspects these its confirm that region the texts the Hence, Bulgarianstatus. or Romanian in markers linguistic and religious identity, national common legacy, historical in manifesting Romania or Bulgaria of rest the and population its with Dobruja

Iorga - rudd h priiat o te eae a t gnrt te da o idea the generate to had debate the of participants the grounded ian cause one should point out and investigate the four elements that make the basis of the of basis the make that elements four the investigate and out point should one cause ian , “ , Iorga’s argument reaches further when the historian addresses the less distant periods of periods distant less the addresses historian the when further reaches argument Iorga’s one the is text the in used arguments influential most the of one and first The Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianuar 1910 de Nicolae Iorga, Nicolae de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce

Dobruja that binds it together with the R the with together it binds that Dobruja 2.

ans we have not only most of our blood, but also almost everything from from everything almost also but blood, our of most only not have we ans p

nationalism: . 5 Conceptualizing bordersthe of Bulgarian and Romanian

- 6

notes: “But Rome represents the most perfect political conception political perfect most the represents Rome “But notes: 245 religiousboundaries and linguistic ties.

re - constructing history, national identity, have to be read primarily to discover and analyze analyze and discover to primarily read be to have omanian nation of the beginning of the 20 the of beginning the of nation omanian f solidarity between between solidarity f used on the “Roman “Roman the on used

referring to to referring milarly 64 th ,

CEU eTD Collection spiritual and spiritual landthe successors among theby others Roman and of right”. are we was: once it what be never will it and longer any exist not does Byzantium Nevertheless, was it way the in only inherit could once, at Hellenized Byzantines, the which Romania, a East of itse imposed It Antiquity. of 251 250 249 248 247 246 land”. Parvan Vasile professor foreigners, learned the among learned most the with improving and Tolescu professor from beginning archeologists our legacyancient, isdepicted notonlyas but “Macedono wa author, the to according Dobruja, 1877 of war the during earned also have they which land, ancestral this over rights Romanian the of legitimacy the recognize fully to wished Berlin of congress 15 the until Wallachia of part made cause. coincides latecomers The interpretations. of mainly out coming and careful the

Ibidem, Culea, Ibidem Quadrilatere”, meridionale. e Dobroudja “ a Ibidem, Ibidem, the ugra barbarians Bulgarian 251 collapsed Dacia. The Latin culture as well as culture Latin The Dacia. collapsed

Iorga’s issues regarding regarding issues Iorga’s Apostol Culea presents the same is same the presents Culea Apostol Dobruja time the “All once: at out points meridionale” Dobroudja “La of author The Cat trebuie trebuie Cat 12 p. ,

p. 5 p. p p ue c Culea p p . 10 . . 6 -

Romanians”. cultural presence in the region during region the in presence cultural

- 7

am ta bfr ee cmn t Dca te Romans the Dacia, to coming even before that laims sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa

ih iia ves xrse ltr y te spotr o te Romanian the of supporters other by later expressed views similar with 249 . 247

While the Bulgarians are “the recent population”, recent “the are Bulgarians the While lf through weapons and organizational power of Trajan on the land land the on Trajan of power organizational and weapons through lf

H wvr te lis f h Rmna hsoin r sil rather still are historian Romanian the of claims the owever, the Dobrujan history are connected mainly with Romania’s Romania’s with mainly connected are history Dobrujan th s not only “the strategic border”, but also the land of of land the also but border”, strategic “the only not s

etr, h é the century,

also Paris, 1919, p. 4 p. 1919, Paris, sue, referring also to archeology: “The researches of of researches “The archeology: to also referring sue, , Bucuresti, 1928, p.19 1928, Bucuresti, , as ,

have proved that Dobruja is the oldest Roman Roman oldest the is Dobruja that proved have one the as the Roman form of state had state of form Roman the as all the periods of its’ history and history its’ of periods the all idea of all other nati other all of idea poque of the Turkish invasion, and the the and invasion, Turkish the of poque

“deserved inwar”. 246

- who , 1878”. ons of Dobruja being being Dobruja of ons

em o e direct be to seem 248 250

the Romanian the h Southern The created in the in created

resistance to resistance 65 .

CEU eTD Collection Elder the to back goes Culea authors, Romanian the of majority the Like author. the by Romanian purely considered is family Assan) (or Asen the and alba” “Vlahia them. within element Romanian the of importance the underlines he although do legacy Byzantine Romanians”. “other like just the in Dobruja from Romanians the that out pointing him to according Romanians modern the of ancestors 257 256 255 254 253 252 my own, their of those about talking them hear I When ploughs! the by left furrows in just wish, Tudose that mouths”, occupation Romanian the before constantlyhearing was Macarie, Tudose cafés, the in Bulgarians local the with talks his During evidence. reliable Bessarabia, in born was Macarie, Th name. by Macarie Tudose man, old local a with conversations oral his reproducesheDobruja, characterRomanian idealisticof pastoral the Describing locals. the of province, the over legacy historical Romanian justifying of methods his and writer, a is ethnographers, image the region. of

Ibidem I Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem ibidem bide ’s reign over Dobruja, describing it as the time the as it describing Dobruja, over reign ’s , , p It should be highlighted that Culea, unlike many of Bulgarian historians, politicians or politicians historians, Bulgarian of many unlike Culea, that highlighted be should It

, p. 35 p. , 32 p. , 31 p. ,

p 257

. . 4 surpass the elaborated interpretations of events and happening and events of interpretations elaborated the surpass

- asking the Bulgarians if they have found something left from their voievod their from left something found have they if Bulgarians the asking Macarie added Macarie 5

the stories of the Buthe of stories the 255

not seem to play a significant role in Dobruja’s history according to Culea, Culea, to according history Dobruja’s in role significant a play to seem not

: “Haven’t found anything?! And from our Trajan Trajan our from And anything?! found “Haven’t :

253

happened 256 The first and second Bulgarian Bulgarian second and first The

however, his considerati his however, lgarian past of the region and Bulgarian voievods ruling it it ruling voievods Bulgarian regionandthe of past lgarian . Nevertheless, the old man, knew “how to shut their shut to “how knew man, old the Nevertheless, .

medieval that had shaped completely the Romanian Romanian the completely shaped had that ,

oqee Dobruja. conquered ons are presented by the author the by presented are ons

times were founding small states small founding were times short period of Mircea the Mircea of period short igos s el s the as well as kingdoms e “authentic local” Tudose Tudose local” “authentic e s , referring to the voices the to referring , 252

– Dobruja is called is Dobruja

ue continues Culea as much as you as much as . After .

254 66 as

CEU eTD Collection remarkable Dobruja appea affirmation, Geto ancestors, our by Antiquity in ruled and inhabited viewed as “ours”,belonging tothe Romanian nation. peace!” in me leave not does blood my pains: heart 264 263 262 261 260 259 258 to rights historical “Bulgaria’s writes his Dobruja in Markov Milan party. Bulgarian the about also made histo Dobruja’s of idea common less byhowever,what ofmedieval hemeans “nationality” inthe terms Dobruja. noth implies nationality “his that Hungarian”. or Romanian Greek, land, any held have might he as conquest of right by it held and adventurer “an was he that acknowledges he lord, famous most its remaining Romans”. of rule “just the after region the devastated they that mentioning Slavs, the about remarks negative several beginning theachievementsto diminish ofDobrujan “voievods medieval attempt not does he However, elements. Vlach/Romanian the nevertheless, highlighting, region, side), Romanian the and

Ibidem. Stoica, Stoica Ibidem Ibidem Romulus, Ibidem Romulus Seisanu, when explaining the history of Dobruja, repeats that “this land was was land “this that repeats Dobruja, of history the explaining when Seisanu, Romulus As it becomes clear from the previously cited works, the Romanian side had a more or more a had side Romanian the works, cited previously the from clear becomes it As the in already contains Stoica Vasile by edited work, the book, Seisanu’s Unlike

260 (ed.), , p. 147 p. ,

p. 19 p.

Seisanu Seisanu

that are almost impossible to prove. to impossible almost are that fact that proves the existence of rather limited communication between the between communication limited rather of existence the proves that fact

TheDobrogea

that it is the land where Asparuk where land the is it that Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, r even even r

261 , , New1919 York, more interesting details about the Vlach origins of prince Balica of of Balica prince of origins Vlach the about details interesting more

Seisanu does not deny or try to hide the Bulgarian presence in the in presence Bulgarian the hide to try or deny not does Seisanu

262 n a t te ainlt o hs subjects”, his of nationality the to as ing ry connected to that of Romania. Similar conclusions can be be can conclusions Similar Romania. of that to connected ry bu Dobrotich, About ,

p. 18 p.

Referring h in the 7 the in h 258

, Bucuresti, 1928, p. p. 14 1928, Bucuresti, ,

In this way, Emperor Trajan i Trajan Emperor way, this In h mitie cnrl vr Dobruja over control maintained who

to the to - th ain ad Romans”. and Dacians

century founded the Bulgarian Cis Bulgarian the founded century ” – considerations of Mutafchiev (a Mutafchiev of considerations

of any possible origin.any possible of

264 263

o explaining, not

Later he adds he Later 259

s suddenly s

fe this After Bulgarian Bulgarian

67 -

CEU eTD Collection ocuin I sie f l proa atpty hc a itra mgt n might historian a which antipathy personal all of spite In conclusion: geographer and historian Roumanian third a Yorga, of thesis the accepting and r possible of claim a to fictions historical these somewhat reduce to constrained himself saw patriot, Roumanian noisy a himself Yorga, historian Roumanian keen the on and voyvodes Wallachian some of titles false the on based is and invention, an be to appears theory historical This voievods, giving a ki Danubian 268 267 46 p. 266 265 has and over domination Turkish the of years first the during “Even affirmation: another by supported is argument the congress” Bulgaria”. “Black or “Bulgaria” Dobruja 10 the in Porphyrogenete Dobrotich. name ruler’s Bulgarian the from Dobruja comes name the that underlining legacy, medieval Bulgarian of ideas the widens Ishirkov Northern becametarget which Dobruja, main fo Romania’s times. medieval from Bulgaria to connected region, a was it historically as Romania, for importance strategic Dobr that out points he rights, historical Bulgaria’s to referring when However, Romania. for Dobruja of insignificance economical the proving in interested more is Penakov Mircho voyvode the under 1386 year the after only place took rule a such that and Dobrudja, ruled never Radu and Vladimir under (Wallachia) Muntenia that us to prove time the of sources and documents

Ibidem Ischirkoff, Penacoff Marcoff

nie akv wo ihihs h mdea Blain eay n h rgo, Ivan region, the in legacy Bulgarian medieval the highlights who Markov, Unlike

taken part in the battle of Nikoppolis during the year 1396, tells us:….The third Bulgaria Bulgaria third us:….The tells year 1396, the during Nikoppolis of battle the in part taken

, ,

Bulgaria’s Bulgaria’s imagination of the Roumanian chauvinistic writers. Thus is explained the fact that subsequently the the subsequently that fact the explained is Thus writers. chauvinistic Roumanian the of imagination Le problem de la Dobroudja de Sud. Un aspect econ Un aspect Sud. de Dobroudja la de problem Le Les Bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique et ethnographique et historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Bulgares Les ngdom. 266

long, elaboratedexplanation: long, It should be notes that for Penakov Cadrilater matters more to Bulgaria than Bulgaria to more matters Cadrilater Penakov for that notes be should It historical historical 265

He denies the fact that in 1372 Dobruja was conquered by the Wallachian the by conquered was Dobruja 1372 in that fact the denies He

th Bulgaria

century and the Russian ch Russian the and century rights over Dobrudja over rights

ule over Dobrudja by the voyvode Mircho. Speaking on this disputed point point disputed this on Speaking Mircho. voyvode the by Dobrudja over ule , the Bavarian traveler, who has who traveler, Bavarian the , 268

In “The political fate of Dobroudja after the Berlin the after Dobroudja of fate political “The In , Bern, 1918, p. p. 3 Bern, 1918, ,

omique et social de ce ce problem et de social omique 267 ronicler Nestor in the 12 the in Nestor ronicler

ae h mnin ta Constantine that mentions he Later r Romanization sincer Romanization 1878.

aturally have against the Bulgarians, the the Bulgarians, the against have aturally , Berne, 1919, p. 5 p. 1919, ,Berne,

trav —

captain Jonescu, comes to this this to comes Jonescu, captain ersed the Danubian lands lands Danubian the ersed , Paris, 1928, Paris, , th

century called century - Negru Bassarab Bassarab Negru uja had only only had uja

68 .

CEU eTD Collection lvc rgn f h wr “Dobruja” word the of origin Slavic the underlines first historian Bulgarian the colleague, Romanian his with Arguing opponent. peopleswere inhabiting civilized Dobruja ancient notthe most culture, or blood origin, by Romans or Thracians Romanians, the that out pointing province, the of past Greek the to attention special dedicates Ishirkov Rome, of descendants the being Kaliakra”. is capital its Danube: the of mouth the at lies volume the in published Добруджа 274 273 272 p. 147 1999, 1999/Mutafchiev, 271 270 269 argument historical the to connected very is debate, the international significance”. nation Bulgarian 13 the in only organization state own its with nation separate a as history Mutafchiev’s Sharing region. degr their in vary that patterns similar be to are that ones Romanian the contested. to also appealing region, the over legacy historical the land. the over ruling was kingdom Bulgarian barbarians” the the when already later, of Dobruja to came numerous not were that settlers sword Romanian that explains the under fell there, remained have could that everything

Ibidem Ibidem Ischirkoff, Markov, Мутафчиев Любомир All these aspects find their reflection in the works of Mutafchiev, Iorga’s most fervent most Iorga’s Mutafchiev, of works the in reflection their find aspects these All The concept of origin of the population regarded in the works of the participants of the of participants the of works the in regarded population the of origin of concept The present to seem sides Bulgarian and Romanian both different, ideologically Although , p. 83 p. , 68 p. , , The political fate of of Dobr fate political The

София

Les Bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique et ethnographique et historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Bulgares Les

Миле ,

Добруджа orj i te at Blain ad oain i te itr o te auin lands Danubian the of history the in Romanians and Bulgarians past: the in Dobruja

1918/ had already passed six centuries of history with cultural and military deeds of deeds military and cultural with history of centuries six passed already had тич Dobruja

“ ,

Ljubomir Българи

, Sofia, 1918, p. 107 Sofia,1918, , миналото

274 Miletich, “ Miletich, views, Ljubomir Miletich notes that “the Romanians appear in in appear Romanians “the that notes Miletich Ljubomir views,

oudja after the Berlin congress Berlin the after oudja и

румъни :

Българи . Bulgarians and Romanians in their cultural and historical rela historical and cultural their in Romanians and Bulgarians 271 e f eain f h peec o te nei the of presence the of negation of ee

e ds ht atr h Rmn had Romans the “after that adds He 273 техните

Mutafchiev sums Mutafchiev Румуни

културно to te ue bt oe eae t the to related more but use, they ation

269 в , Sofia, 1919, p.3 Sofia,1919, ,

историята

Contesting Romanian claims Romanian Contesting - . исторически 270

, Berne, 1919, p. 13 p. 1919, ,Berne, up Bulgarian arguments about arguments Bulgarian up

на

дунавските

отношения th

century, when the the when century,

ghbor in the the in ghbor

земи ” et Dacia, left

, of them of

272 сборник София Sofia, , tions” tions”

and 69 ,

CEU eTD Collection Bulgarian presence. it, in elements Turkish several with Romanian and Turtukaia in nei predominantly live Cadrilater from Romanians “The that: underlined is it activities. their of character the and Romanians the of presence appeals however, character, multiethnic its denying not regions, the in Romanians of presence ethnical the explaining when Seisanu, province. mixed the in elements Bulgarian or Romanian the of role the of explanation Lausanne 280 p.9 munte,1910, Valenii de 279 278 277 276 275 from the Romanian inhabitants presence inDobruja the of existence the without impossible been have would region the in rule Romanian Comn region. the of masters” “proud as Romanians the presenting rights Romania’s justify us”. concerning and ourselve of numerous proud enough enough are We ideal. anybody’s abolish to want not do we spirit, anybody’s conquer to want not do we language, anybody’s the steal to want not do “We writes: historian au foreign the familiarize to had feeling pro or Romanian the between from trusted

Ibidem Ibidem Quadrilatere”, meridionale. e Dobroudja “ a Romulus, Iorga Petrescu hoig villages”. ghboring en generally supported the idea of Romanian element being dominant, pointing out that thethat out pointing beingelementdominant, Romanian of idea generallythe en supported , “ , Unlike accura present not does authors, other several unlike Iorga, - , p. 3 p. , , p. 16 p. , Paris, 1918, p 1918, Paris, Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianu 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce -

Comnen Seisan - the point of view of view of point the 7

Petrescu 279 u, ,

Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, „ a Dobrogea Dobroudja): essai histori ue, conomi ue, ethnographi ue et politi ue politi et ue ethnographi ue, conomi ue, histori essai Dobroudja): Dobrogea „ a i ve i sae b Nicolae by shared is view His 278 . p

. . 4

276

- - 10 Comnen, Comnen,

s so that we would we that so s h Nrhr Dbua acrig o h ato, a ams purely almost was author, the to according Dobruja, Northern The

to folklore, popular poems and ethnographic sources featuring the featuring sources ethnographic and poems popular folklore, to

of Dobruja that had told him of Dobruja him told thathad - oain ouain n orj ad te Rmnas This Romanians. other and Dobruja in population Romanian both sides), but attempts to create a strong feeling of solidarity of feeling strong a create to attempts but sides), both Seisanu or other authors, w authors, other or Seisanu Romanian The Dobruja. in situation the with dience Paris, 1919, p. 13 p. 1919, Paris, n’t

plead before somebody for for somebody before plead 277 Petrescu

Cadrilater , Bucuresti, 1928, p. p. 15 1928, Bucuresti, ,

how “their ancestors had living been - onn wo n i wr tis to tries work his in who Comnen, riter Apostol Culea presents stories presents Culea Apostol riter 275 however, ,

In “la Dobroudja meridionale” Dobroudja “la In te data (which can hardly be be hardly can (which data te ar 1910 de Nicolae Iorga, Nicolae de 1910 ar - 23

a a ey distinct very a had

the political causes political 280

Romanian Romanian

Petrescu 70 ”, - ,

CEU eTD Collection ecnat o rfge fo Taslai (o yt ne te oain oto) r non or control) Romanian the the being under yet them (not of Transylvania some from Dobruja, refugees in of lived descendants Romanians many that out points Gabe Petar Bulgaria the proofselaborated, of the as many of thelandRomanian in spirit between Danube. theseaand the people, of and narratives personal interviews to appeals names, several mentions Culea territories”. those on centuries for 287 286 Dobruja 285 284 p. 347 Sofia,1994), IInd edition, Petrov, Petar prof. editor and Compiler scholars. 283 Compi scholars. other universityand проф. редактор 282 281 re centuriesthe province. rule legacy, had ofhistorical rights to its the in present and active element, Bulgarian the that conclusion population. urban the the became of also part they Later important Danube). of banks the along fishermen Romanian of colonies made 19 the of end the in back came Chilingirov, to according Bulgarians, t of k Bulgarianwherecoming first toDobruja, the back of the province inthe j Bulgarian cruelties.population andRomanian the about said be not could same the however, Dobruja, of inhabitants Romanian Hungary. orthodox Петър

Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem Culea, See Стилиян e province he

up ача кпдця Дбуж, 97 г. 1917 Добруджа, в експедиция Научна

The Bulgarian side, compared to the Romanian one, seem one, Romanian the to compared side, Bulgarian The hlnio atat te teto o te edr o h dsiis f ay f Bulgarians of many of destinies the to reader the of attention the attracts Chilingirov

(part of the reports of the scientific expedition in Dobru expedition ofthe scientific the of(part reports Габе Cat trebuie trebuie Cat

the bigger part of the peasant the of part bigger the

Чилингиров , Жестокости

еъ Петров Петър n 8h n 1h century. 19h and 18th in sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa 283

ust character rulecenturies oflegacy. Bulgarian ust thathad ofthe , ae lo oe ta t that notes also Gabe Възраждане , 1917/ Petar Gabe, Gabe, Petar 1917/ , ,

II ид, ои. 1994/ София. изд., .

ler and editor prof. Petar Petrov, IInd edition, Sofia,1994 IInd edition, Petrov, Petar prof. editor and ler h, codn t hi to according who, 284 , сборник

It should be noted that Gabe views the Bulgarian character the that views Gabe It noted be should inhabitants Atrocities 287 Доклади на университетски и други учени. Съставител и и Съставител учени. други и университетски на Доклади 285

, Bucuresti, ,

“ e ugras n 97 ee ey oeat o the to tolerant very were 1917 in Bulgarians he Добруджа

hs cnieain big hlnio t the to Chilingirov bring considerations These ae, rw aa fo ter ad gi, the again, land their from away drawn Later, Scientific n presence come from the expedition of1917.expedition presence fromn come the , 1917 1917 ,

(it should (it ingdom had originated, afteringdom the hadoriginated, m, ja in 1917), inp 1917), ja 1928, p 1928,

, 1918/ ”, (published in (published

represent the Romanian nation and the the and nation Romanian the represent expedition 281

p be noted that Chili that noted be . 3

Stilijan . 161 . - 17

s in

Reports of the the of Reports

to be more ethnographically more be to

Dobruja

Chilingirov, Chilingirov, in n rlig n the on relying and gion th

century. , 1917. 1917. ,

university and other other and university ngirov Revival 286

Reports of the the of Reports devastations

hy first They mentions mentions , volume volume , 282 71 -

CEU eTD Collection the Romanian element is presented as alien and imposed, while the Bulgarian one turns out to be to out turns one Bulgarian the while imposed, and alien as presented is element Romanian the Bucharest”in course high having its is still and had whichword, magic the nationalism, of name the in done was that “all adds MarkovDobruja, of Romanization R the apparition an as pursue to itself in sufficient was element dominant a as Bulgarians the of presence “The manner: efficient than Dobruja cities to villages the from move to began population Bulgarian “the that admits Zlatarski Vasil Similarly, 290 289 Historical 288 blood of victim the with taken Christianity the not is it martyrs, have not does others of Christianity Orthodox The Why? gently. more down come sun the of rays the bigger, Romania the of crosses golden the above numerous…But most the are faith, Christian Eastern the to belong and Orthodox are that those them, among and land, this on churches many “There’re writes: churchesand the of appurtenance the to related were generally Dobruja, in faith of questions the regarding for target oppressions, Turkish of Christianity meridionale” Dobroudja “La In aspec important more one to also but legacy, natural andoriginal.

La Dobroud La MilanMarkov, Васил Златарски, Златарски, Васил Iorga when highlighting t highlighting when Iorga historical of issues the to only not related was Dobruja in identities national of idea The

ratherearly and political destiny political and any n orthodox churches, although small and poor compared to others that are richer and and richer are that others to compared poor and small churches,although orthodox n ja meridionale. Le Quadrilatere jameridionale. to all R The political fate of Dobroudja after the Berl the after Dobroudja of fate political The proving one’sChristian”. nationproving tobe“more mna rlgos rpgna Te da ta wr epesd y oh sides both by expressed were that ideas The propaganda. religious omanian te nationalities”. other and before our li beforeour and орда Историко Добруджа.

290

however, the Bulgarians, sharing the same Orthodox faith, were a hard a were faith, Orthodox same the sharing Bulgarians, the however, , Sofia, 1918, p. 105 105 p. Sofia,1918, ,

omanian nationalists and governments”. and nationalists omanian he unity of the Romanians within the boundaries of Orthodoxy, of boundaries the within Romanians the of unity he beration the Bulgarians w Bulgarians the beration 288 ,

Paris, 191 Paris,

- полити ia Mro epess iia ies bt n more a in but ideas, similar expresses Markov Milan

t, depicted by the authors, the concept of religion. religion. of concept the authors, the by depicted t, the the ек съдба ческа 9,p Romanians is viewed as an opposition to the to opposition an as viewed is Romanians p in congress in . 3 - 8

Сфя 1918/ София, ,

, ere more ere

Sofia, 1917, 20 p. Sofia,1917,

dramatically failed dramatically

numerous in the cities of of cities the in numerous 289

Vasil

Criticizing the forced the Criticizing

in the great hour great the in Zlatarski . In this way, In this . , Dobruja 72 .

CEU eTD Collection orthodox faithful were in the dependence of the Romanian bishop of Braila, another sign of the the of sign another Braila, of bishop Romanian the of dependence the in were faithful orthodox fall the since “Moreover, Stoica: Vasile by edited book the in mentioned also is status “inferior” Their Romanians. the than Christian less much became Romanians. the together brings that boundary Turkish be called well decisions”.of 298 297 was founded. until 1862, Church 296 295 294 293 292 p.9 munte,1910, Valenii de 291 the of borderlands the on territories get to Bulgarians the helped orthodoxy to conversion the that heritage Greek Iorga’sout that points opinion the to opposing Bulgarian. Mutafchiev or consideredRomanian either to connected also are region the in presence Romanian region, the of past Greek Ancient the Christianityf depicting when Ishirkov aspect. religious the to referring when strategies similar applied Bulgarians The legacy s inthe 14 episcopate Vicina, a Romanianexisted in there under Ottoman rule the came Dobruja “before even that writes works, Iorga’s on assumptions his basing probably most episcopa Romanian several mentions principalities”. Romanian the and Dobrogea the between existing ties close

Ibidem Ischirkoff, Romulus Iorga. Stoica, Culea, Iorga, h Blain xrht ws one ol af only founded was exarchate Bulgarian The o Aotl ue te da f oain rhdx hd smlr meanin similar a had orthodoxy Romanian of idea the Culea Apostol For

Droits nationaux et politiques des Roumains dans la la dans Dobroudja. Roumains des politiques et Droitsnationaux tretched over the Danube, thetretched over tooriental Wallachia”.

Cat trebuie trebuie Cat , p. 13 p. , “ (ed.), (ed.), Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianuar 1910 de Nicolae Iorga, Nicolae de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce

the Seisanu, Seisanu, Les Bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique et ethnographique et historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Bulgares Les irst and directly from Byzantium. irst anddirectlyfrom

“The Dob “The 291 - history of Dobruja, point out that Bulgarians, unlike Romanians, converted to to converted Romanians, unlike Bulgarians, that out point Dobruja, of history groundedfrom ofview theBulgarian the point of side.

This affirmation seemed to be rather convincing to Iorga, however, it can hardly can it Iorga, however, to convincing rather be seemedto affirmation This Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa

rogea”

, New York, 1919, New1919, , York,

298 tes in Dobruja, in tes

one may suppose that his attempts to diminish the mere the diminish to attempts his that suppose may one ter the Bulgarian Patriarchate that was united with the Greek Greek the with united was that Patriarchate Bulgarian the ter p.17 , Bucuresti, 1928, p 1928, Bucuresti, , 297

Taking into account Ishirkov’s attentionTaking accountpaid into to 294 , Bucuresti, 1928, p. p. 165 1928, Bucuresti, , 292

not referring to any Bulgarian. Seisanu, Bulgarian. any to referring not 295

The Bulgarians, however, however, Bulgarians, The , f h Bznie mie h Greek the Empire Byzantine the of 296

p Bucharest 1918, p. 75 1918, Bucharest

. 5

- 16 , Berne, 1919, p 1919, ,Berne,

293 p th

. Similarly, Iorga Similarly,

26 century, whose century, whose - g of of g 32 in this way this in

cannot be be cannot an anti 73 - ,

CEU eTD Collection codn t te uhr i i ams ipsil t fn ot hc cmuiy ond the “owned” community which church. out find to impossible almost is it author, the to according both p as considered community, were Romanian Bulgarians and the Romanians to belonged or maintained was Church the that stated Dobruja in Church Romanian Dobruja. meaning Empire, Slovaks. ofthe distinctions Lutheran Catholicand 1976 Toronto, Germ the to 302 contribution Bockh’s censuses. See Hobsbawm. state the of questions the into inserted language the of help the with differences religious by divided and Europe Eastern and Central over all Staates 301 Dobruja 300 p. 8. 1999, 1999/Mutafchiev, 299 inh the among Dobruja. solidarity creating in power its of aware much very were aspect, linguistic highlightingthe specially not although debate, Dobrujan the of participants The nation. overshadowed actuality, its lose not did faith of question the Although matters. religious in united not nations of examples numerous the of few the only become could Slovaks the and Hungarians impor an language, the of help the 18 the in spheres cultural the all in important one. than theethnic less not was that unity linguistic of idea an to debate the of participants the brought issue This i liturgy the of language

For further details see Richard B Richard see details further For Peter Brock, Brock, Peter Стилиян Мутафчиев . Berlin, 1863. The Prussian linguist and and linguist Prussian The 1863. Berlin, .

It should be noted that one of the most important questions was the one connected to the to connected one the was questions important most the of one that noted be should It Common faith, unlike in the case of Romanians and Bulgar and Romanians of case the in unlike faith, Common (part of the reports of the scientific expedition in Dobruja in 1917), 171 inp. 1917), in Dobruja expedition ofthe scientific the of(part reports

Чилингиров . th

In his w his In ,

Hobsbawn, Добруджа

centuries: those non those centuries: h Soa Ntoa aaeig a esy n h itleta hsoy f at eta Europe Central East of history intellectual the in essay an awakening: National Slovak The b orj i te at Blain ad oain i te itr o te auin lands Danubian the of history the in Romanians and Bulgarians past: the in Dobruja y the linguistic feature that turned out to be much more powerful in making a making in powerful more much be to out turned that feature linguistic the y ork the author thoroughly describes how finally the common Slovak language wins over over wins language Slovak common the finally how describes thoroughly author the ork

“ ,

Nations and nationalism sin nationalism and Nations Възраждане в n churches that could be either under Bulgarian or Romanian control. Romanian or Bulgarian under either be could that churches n

because of the religious dissociation of many of the European nations European the of many of dissociation religious the of because миналото 299 ,

ö run aant esn’ clai Seisanu’s against Arguing Chilingirov stresses that in the official Turkish documents it is not is it documents Turkishofficial the in that stresses Chilingirov ckh - Die geschichtliche Entwickelung der amtlichen Statistik des Preussischen Preussischen des Statistik amtlichen der Entwickelung geschichtliche Die ” homogenous states could be equated with nations only with with only nations with equated be could states homogenous : , Българи at oe bign te tgte. h Germans, The together. them bringing power tant сборник statistician proposes an effective way to unite the Germans scattered scattered Germans the unite wayto effective an proposes statistician

и Добруджа

ce 1780 ce Рум rs f “Rum of arts уни , Cambridge, 1992, p Cambridge, , 1992,

, 1918/ 1918/ , в

историята an national cause is also mentioned by by mentioned also is cause national an Stilijan s ht hr eitd ny the only existed there that ms millet ians, could not could ians,

на hlnio, “Revival”, Chilingirov, ”. p

300 . 21 . дунавските

- ec, eoe 1878, before Hence, 22

be introduced introduced be земи abitants of of abitants 302 ,

301 София volume volume Sofia, , was it

the 74 , ,

CEU eTD Collection acrig o edrsu h Rmna shos ht xse i Truaa Tulcea…were Turtucaia, in existed that schools Romanian that the readers Teodorescu his to reminds “according idea, this developing Seisanu, Romulus education. of instrument Romania’s the to it connected which structure, Romance its preserved still had influences, other and Turkish Slavic, Moreover, party. Romanian the of ideology occupie past Roman the above, mentioned was it As side. Romanian the for role double a played language the that considered be can It education. the to connected primarily was language Romanian the of issue the authors Romanian the For th in published Добруджа 307 306 305 304 303 Romanian common almost of centuries middle the of dialect the from language and social national, the in relations their all in and writing national their have not do Romanians) (the “They relations”: historical and cultural their in Romanians and “Bulgarians his in writes Miletich Ljubomir argument. linguistic idea ofthe Romanian languagewith the dominatingRomanian ethnic expressed. is element same the Dobrogea” “The In names. the of origin “Slavic” or “Latin” not “Romanian”, purely more much are locations” ones Bulgarian or Turkish of possible any than numerous names “Romanian the that out points Culea Apostol region, linguistic, only alphabet. Bulgarian the not however, maintained by t

Stoica Culea, Ibidem Seisanu, Romulus Любомир Unlike the Romanians, the Bulgarians turn out to be more persistent more be to out turn Bulgarians the Romanians, the Unlike taught, were alphabet Slavonic and religion schools these in that underlines Seisanu

(ed.), (ed.), Cat trebuie trebuie Cat

, София

e volume e TheDobrogea Милетич he Romanians that formedhe the majority ofthe population”. but also ethnic markers of the population. Referring to Romanian presence in the in presence Romanian to Referring population. the of markers ethnic also but

1918/ Ljubomir 1918/ Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea, despre stieoricine sa Dobruja “

“ , Roman Roman Българи , , NewYork, , Sofia, 1918, p.107 Sofia,1918, ,

heritage

Miletich, “Bulgarian Miletich,

румъни

1919, p 1919, 304 ” . Except for this, the language also had a function of an an of function a had also language the this, for Except . -

- Bulgarian history, affirming that even the contemporary the even that affirming history, Bulgarian This fact, introduced by Seisanu, makes the schools not schools the makes Seisanu, by introduced fact, This Bulgarian period”. Bulgarian

p в . . 10 rvt shr te apa to appeal they sphere private

техните

Bucuresti, 1928, p 1928, Bucuresti, - the language, although having very pronounced pronounced very having although language, the 18 s and Romanians in their cultural and historical relations” relations” historical and cultural their in Romanians and s

a infcn pae n h propagandistic the in place significant a d

културно , Bucuresti, 1928, p.168 1928, Bucuresti, , , 305

without without 307 p -

.39 исторически Miletich, however, highlights the highlights however, Miletich, - 40 explaining the criterion o criterion the explaining

303

the the отношения

in highlighting the highlighting in ugra literary Bulgarian ”

сборник 306 f the f

CEU eTD Collection language. Stressing the importance of the Bulgari the of importance the Stressing language. in occupation Russians”, were Romanian priests the the “all “before example, for that Babadag”, states He community. Bulgarian the of life the Seisanu’s like ideas, his However, influence absurd. been wouldhave language Romanian p. 133 1999, 1999/Mutafchiev, 311 310 Dobruja 309 308 legitimization of theterritorial rights. the of scope same the reach to trying but ways, different in occurrences and events same the simil the Generally, dialogue. work the of aware mainly were debate the of participants The argument. open an into engaging often region, the of M arguments. other’s each imitate or copy to intended hardly parties both that noted be should It claims. territorial justify Th Romanian, and,ofthe theregion. hence, therightfulness Bulgarian underlines legacy in the over language Bulgarian the of superiority the proves aspect this historian Bulgarian the For Bulgar Romanian, unlike propaganda: Romanian the diminish could that detail interesting one out points factor, linguistic Dobruja. in revival Bulgarian the to keys the of one

Ibidem, Ibidem e texts of the authors from both sides present examples of how the opponents were trying to to trying were opponents the how of examples present sides both from authors the of texts e Стилиян Мутафчиев

hlnio, ie ieih hgl apeitd h rl o te ugra language. Bulgarian the of role the appreciated highly Miletich, like Chilingirov, (part of the reports ofthe the of(part reports

. 172 . Чилингиров ,

Добруджа Dobruja in the past: Bulgarians and Romanians in the history of the Danubian Danubian the of history the in Romanians and Bulgarians past: the in Dobruja - 173 s published by their opponents. N opponents. their by published s

a so had “ ,

Възраждане ian has almost no Vlach or Romanian borrowings in its vocabulary. its in borrowings Romanian or Vlach no almost has ian в ore

миналото scientific e scientific arity of the rhetoric can be explained by the attempts to re to attempts the by explained be can rhetoric the arityof m

likely, n tae o Blain n t ht h dna of denial the that it in Bulgarian of traces any 308 ,

” were more connected to the ed the to connected more were , :

they simply reflected their reflected simply they Българи

xpedition in Dobruja in 1917), inp 1917), in Dobruja xpedition сборник

и Добруджа

Румуни an schools, Chilingirov views the language as language the views Chilingirov schools, an evertheless, they did not always enter into a into enter always not did they evertheless,

310 , 1918/Stilijan, Chilingirov Chilingirov 1918/Stilijan, , в

историята 309 uaciv we adesn t the to addressing when Mutafchiev,

hs hy ee sn te Russian the using were they thus

ideas connected with the history the with connected ideas . 171 . ucation and religious part of of part religious and ucation

на

дунавските “Revival”, volume volume “Revival”, the

земи lands Bulgarian Bulgarian

- interpret ,

София Sofia, , 311 76 ,

CEU eTD Collection oiie svrl eae t ps fr h seetps o e mrne i te osiuns of consciousness audien the groupsof different the in imprinted be to stereotypes the for pass to decades several solicited criminals. and did Romanians of figures the countries, two between that, out points literature, Bulgarian when Stancheva, Rumiana 315 314 313 312 destroying imagesremains positive theof oftheperiod. preceding t s pronounced less a in but ideas, same the supported such, as nation Bulgarian the to appeal to willing less authors the even However, writing. author’s degr the Romanians: brutality. cruelty, ferocity, character, uncivilized barbarian, absolutely possess: to supposed been had they traits negative debate. territorial the of participants representative most several the of texts the in generated images documents. official with texts written through it grasped intellectuals o side the from other the of perceptions t of 19 the of half second the century. of wars the of products completely almost were neighbors the trategy of portraying Romanians and, conversely, they had to face the same dilemma of of dilemma same the face to had they conversely, and, Romanians portraying of trategy

I. N. Roman, N. I. Ibidem Njagulov, Stanch he images, being produced by different social and cultural communities. He states that the the that states He communities. cultural and social different by produced being images, he I.N. Roman in “Analele Dobrogei”, refer Dobrogei”, “Analele in Roman I.N.

313 eva,

es images de l’autre chez les bulgares et les roumaines les et lesbulgares l’autrechez de esimages The Bulgarian historian also highlights one extremely important fact important extremely one highlights also historian Bulgarian The Les images de roumaine dans labulgare littérature dans roumaine de images Les “ 312 Proi 3.

ect h poes f rdcn crctrs f n aohr a cmlctd and complicated was another one of caricatures producing of process The Creating images of one another: “The war of e, gesturi, cuvintegesturi,bulgăreşti e,

e of ee 314

315

eern t te opeiy f h iae o te oain i the in Romanians the of images the of complexity the to referring radicalism of this “description” varied due to the manner of the the of manner the to due varied “description” this of radicalism the of examination the on concentrated is hence, part, current The ce. Blagovest Njagulov underlines that the Bulgarian stereotypesthe of that underlinesNjagulov Blagovestce.

Bulgarians were generally presented as something opposite opposite something as presented generally were Bulgarians although the events of 1913 had 1913 of events the although f the common folk came from from came folk common the f ”, în în ”, ,

n o te oenetl level governmental the on and Analele Dobrogei, Analele ring to Bulgarians in general, summed up all the all up summed general, in Bulgarians to ring

not immediately turn into those of villains of those into turn immediately not , Sofia,1994, ,

(1878 - n. ugras dpe similar adopted Bulgarians one. anul I, nr. 1, 1920, Cernăuţi, p. 126 Cernăuţi, p. 1920, anul1, nr. I, 1944),

nr. 3,

badly affected the relations relations the affected badly Sofia, nr. 2/1995, p. 6 2/1995, Sofia,nr.

p p. 6 p. - 7 caricatures” folklore, while the the while folklore,

it was connected connected was it –

the diversity the

77 to th

CEU eTD Collection even referring to the works of Miletich from the Bulgarian part, claims that, especially in in especially that, claims part, Bulgarian the from Miletich of works the to referring even opini public local and foreign the adds tha ideal”. national their of realization the for fighting were that Danube the of side other to Romanians by offered hospitality the forgotten have they like just yoke 1877 of war the in Romania by made sacrifices the Seisanu “backstabbing”. of notion the with began sides both from image positive the of destruction The 319 318 317 316 debates, of participants the of texts the in developed ideas, These backstabbing. for except nothing at good were who Bulgarians, spies a of rid get could they that so night the of middle were the in leave to population authorities Bulgarian the helping Turkish the Even Dobruja. through was escapers unfortunate those of way the where Bessarabia, of South the or Russia to off took and carnage the from flee to up rose population Bulgarian the why is That Russian the of rid getting were Turks the “When emig “the Bulgarians, to attitude author’s The Adrianople. of series the after ma that adds consists population Bulgarian existent the Dobruja, Northern

Culea, Culea, Ibidem Seisanu, nd guides of the Russian armies”.nd guides ofthe Russian Therefore, Culea constantly stresses the fact that even the Turks wanted to get rid of rid get to wanted Turks the even that fact the stresses constantly Culea Therefore, , t Dobruja was t Dobrujapart never of

Cat trebuie trebuie Cat Dob despre stieoricine sa trebuie Cat

when writing about Bulgarians in his books, notes: “Bulgarians have quickly forgotten forgotten quickly have “Bulgarians notes: books, his in Bulgarians about writing when Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, 318 ny of the of ny

sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa the

tried to escape from the fury of the Ottomans and found shelter in Dobruja in shelter found and Ottomans the of furythe from escape to tried Russian

- Turkish wars, especially after the signing of the Treaty of of Treaty the of signing the after especially wars, Turkish n patcly netn te Dbua question”. “Dobrujan the inventing practically on, re remained empty places after the Tatars had left them. The The them. left had Tatars the after places empty remained re Medieval Bulgaria, but the Bulgarians were Bulgarians trying tostir Medieval Bulgaria, butthe still

r vee as b Gog Ugrau wo carefully who Ungureanu, George by also viewed are rogea 319

, Bucuresti, 1928, p. p. 159 1928, Bucuresti, , p 1928, Bucuresti, , , Bucuresti, 1928, 253 p. 1928, Bucuresti, , rants and escapers and rants s , they gave the rebelled Bulgarians hard times! hard Bulgarians rebelled the gave they , - 1878 for their liberation from the Ottoman the from liberation their for 1878 p .

160 purely of emigrants. He further further He emigrants. of purely

”

161 seems to be full of neglect: neglect: of full be to seems

the refugees from the from refugees the 316 317

Later heLater

Culea, the the 78

CEU eTD Collection works andof previous Bulgarian literatureand epochs observing dynamics. its 1913 the of texts the on focus particularly not do they Bulgarian troublesome Romanian Stanch the Ungureanu, on Cadrilater of question the of impact the examines 324 323 322 321 320 political of out who authorities, Turkish the of protection the under Danube the of banks they that so country their from fled had who deserters the were those “But adds: then and Dobruja in Romanians of existence the admits who Djakovich, by also expressed them. from expected be can that all is treachery hence, and, honorably wars wage to unable are Romanians terms, evasive rather in himself expresses who Ishirkov, 1877 of war history” glorious of deprived are Romans, the of successors the themselves consider who Romanians, “the that the unfavorable ofsuch outcomes actions. c others and Kogalniceanu Vasile Ionescu, Take like intellectuals, Romanian several that admitting Cadrilater, annex to it pushed have might that side Romanian the from “jealousy” Romani the by back the in stabbed themselves felt Bulgarians the hence, Greece, and Serbia against fighting

Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem, Ischirkoff Ungureanu,

s well as The “treacherous Bulgarian “treacherous The Making considerations about the events of 1913 and following years, Ishirkov stresses stresses Ishirkov years, following and 1913 of events the about considerations Making

102 , Les Bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique e historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Bulgares Les - n, hm hy rvosy con previously they whom ans,

Chestiunea Cadrilaterului. Interese romanesti s romanesti Interese Cadrilaterului. Chestiunea 1878 and accentuate and 1878 oaintop takCdiae n h oet hn ugra ocs were forces Bulgarian when moment the in Cadrilater attack troops Romanian . . 322 eva and Njagulov provide the reader with very useful remarks about the the about remarks useful very with reader the provide Njagulov and eva

T h - ey attempt ey Romani

n rcs o “creat of process an d ed

s” compete with “untrustworthy Romanians” in the Bulgarian Bulgarian the in Romanians” “untrustworthy with compete s” the short rule of Mircea the Elder in Dobruja. in Elder the Mircea of rule short the

to present themselves as the most splendid winners in the in winners splendid most the as themselves present to 321

iee ale. sikv points Ishirkov allies. sidered t ethnographique i revizionism bulgar, 1938 bulgar, i revizionism n crctrs f n aohr. H another”. one of caricatures ing - 1940 debate, appealing to the Romanian Romanian the to appealing debate, 1940 , Berne, 1919, p. 103 p. 1919, ,Berne,

- ugra relations. Bulgarian - 1940 324

could hide along the along hide could

h sm ie is idea same The

, Bucuresti, 2005 Bucuresti, , u te at of fact the out 323

According toAccording ould foresee ould owever, owever,

320 79

CEU eTD Collection about the vulgarity and “lack of civiliz of “lack and vulgarity the about dress”. the of fallals the under blouse dressed and vulgar ” Th settled”. compactly and powerful less element Bulgarian the making at aimed considerations, 328 Balkaniques 327 Cosenza 326 theRoma 325 nob the unlike barbarians” “absolute as warriors not did neighbors traits, common binding togethercountries. the and past common of existence the admitted still but Bulgaria, on dependent neigh the viewed Miletich general. of creators other and innation Romanian the addressof the in remarks insulting of excess the avoided andpropaganda Iorga against arguments ideological had however, Romanian resembled sourcesofawell) caricature barbarian. asa for adequate is affirmation (the sources Bulgarian the in 1913 after Romanians the of image behavior. Romanian typical the of example anas it viewing 1907, of revolt bloodypeasant the to refers later and them inside hidden ferocity cross ”The Romania is the less cultivated country in the whole of the Balkan peninsula. She seems to be a be to seems She peninsula. Balkan the of whole the in country cultivated less the is Romania Александър

Stanch Alberto Basciani, Basciani, Alberto us, th Blagovest Njagulov, Njagulov, Blagovest , 2001, p. p. 123. 2001, , In 1921 Stilijan Chilingirov wrote about his impressions of Romania and Romania of impressions his about wrote Chilingirov Stilijan 1921 In Just lik Just o degree a with Romanians to referring and historian a being Mutafchiev, nians”,published in the volumein the nians”,published e idea of“treachery” only was of the part eva, , Sofia, nr. 2/1995, p. 11 p. 2/1995, Sofia,nr. , od. T road”. “

Les images de roumaine dans la littérature bulgare littérature la dans roumaine de Les images Дякович e the Bulgarian caricatures of of caricatures Bulgarian the e Un conflitto balcanico. La contesa fra Romania e Bulgaria in Dobro in Bulgaria e Romania fra contesa La balcanico. conflitto Un differ much. Even Iorga, when referring to Asparukh, describes him and his his and him describes Asparukh, to referring when Iorga, Even much. differ -

up prosti up e uhr xlis ht rmtv ad abrc oain ol hv their have souls Romanian barbaric and primitive that explains author he , “ ,

“ Добруджа e iae d late hz e blae e ls omie (1878 roumaines les et bulgares les chez l’autre de images Les tute, who eats who tute,

под Dobruja

гнета os s ls dvlpd nation developed less a as bors 326 ation” among the Romanians cited Romanians the among ation”

, Sofia, 1918, p. 369 Sofia,1918, , на

Blagovest Njagulov, discovering the similar opinions similar the discovering Njagulov, Blagovest 327 mamaliga

румънците

“fierce barbarians”, the Romanian images of their their of images Romanian the barbarians”, “fierce Both Njagulov and Stan and Njagulov Both le Romans and their descendants. H descendants. their and Romans le generalantiparticle ofone images another.

”/ while she does not even bother to put on a on put to bother even not does she while ” Alexandar , Sofia, 1994,nr. 3, Sofia,1994,nr.

Djakovich

ht a be culturally been had that p. 6 p. , “Dobruja under the yoke of of yoke the under “Dobruja , eva

Jordan Jovkov’s novel Jovkov’s Jordan

gia del sud del gia 328

underline that thethat underline - 1944) the the Romanians

e also adds also e ” (1918 Romanian în , neglect, f - Études 1940),

325 80 :

CEU eTD Collection ugras acrig o ldsu ae ire idig wo ih ol fr h possibilit the for watch. only fight pocket who wildlings as fierce are Vladescu, objects to according simple Bulgarians, such about knowledge of lack absolute their underlining Bulgarianand for shameful the side Romanian one. the for glorious event the 1916, in Turtukaia of fall the after captivity Bulgarian the into got who Vladescu, Christian of memoirs the in found be to is Bulgarians the of portrayal interesting blood”. with covered “clothes Asparukh’s depicting expressions, dramatic 335 ofCadrilater. annexation policy ofthe Romanian ofthe theabsurdity 334 333 332 331 330 329 “goodRomanian” and sane a to asKogalniceanu Vasile referredto Markov nation. Romanian the demonize to attempt not did cause, Bulgarian the supporting fiercely Penakov, and Markov anti strong very expressed previously, mentioned and expressed their absolutely pointofview. opposite ZeletinStefan propagandists Romanian thos than Bulgarians demonizing more cases many the image ofa prim toy. a as mirror a given were who monkeys, with soldiers Bulgarian compares he pock a had Romanian every that forget not :”Do told been have they battle the before if encouraged more much been have would warriors Bulgarian the the of that bravery impression the preserved have “I notes: author The soldiers. Romanian the robbing

Markov Zeletin, Ischirkoff, Ibidem Ibidem Vla Iorga. descu, descu, Vlade Among the Bulgarian participants of the debate there existed those, who, as it was was it as who, those, existed there debate the of participants Bulgarian the Among supporting those that underlined be should it Nevertheless, Droits nationaux et politiques des Roumains dans la la dans Dobroudja. Roumains des politiques et Droitsnationaux , p.7 ,

, Din ţara măgarilor ţara Din “The political fate of Dobroudja after the Berlin congress”, Berlin the after Dobroudja of fate political “The Bulgarii: memorile unui ofit unui memorile Bulgarii: Les Bulgares en Dobroudja. Apercu historique et ethnographique et historique Apercu Dobroudja. en Bulgares Les

scu writes in great detail about all the atrocities of the Bulgarian soldiers, soldiers, Bulgarian the of atrocities the all about detail great in writes scu 334

or Vasile KogalniceanuVasileor itive anditive aggressive creature i

, 1998, p 1998, , a srn opnns n hi homeland their in opponents strong had

p . 4 erroma 9 - 50. See Zeletin’s poem “Noi vrem bacsis”/”We want a bribe”, mocking mocking wantbribe”, a bacsis”/”We vrem “Noi poem Zeletin’s See 50. ,

n fost prizonier in Bulgaria in prizonier fost n constantl s successfully created. - y criticized the Romanian attitudes toDobrujay criticized theRomanian e supporting the Bulgarian one Bulgarian the supporting e 330 Romanian attitudes an attitudes Romanian

Sofia, 1917, p. p. 20 Sofia,1917,

Bucharest 1918, p. 10 1918, Bucharest . Bucures . , Berne, 1919, p. 103 p. 1919, ,Berne,

the Romanian cause were in in were cause Romanian the h, ie ae Ionescu, Take like who, et full of watches!” of full et ti, 1926. ti,

d also those, who like like who those, also d 329

However, the However,

332 . However, the However, .

In this way, this In 331

e o ies Later most . 335 333 81 f

CEU eTD Collection Romanian occupying Bessarabiaand Bulgarian instead. Dobruja past. Romanian deed honorable not the covering Kostence” of shelter crea had who years many for Romanians among lived who Penakov, 336 participants ofthe debates. two between 1913 of debates The experiences. common sharing t them of the of opinions H absolutely an present not does authors, the of eyes the through Njagulov, and texts, political or ethnographic pol The colleagues. their and public international influential the for mainly woks their produced authors the audience, local the on counting Although societies. both of circles educated and cultured the in resonance wvr i gives it owever,

Иван

h txs f l te atcpns f h debat the of participants the all of texts The Пенаков r ied to avoid the idea of Bulgaria and Romania having centuries of common history and and history common centuriesof having Romania andBulgaria of idea the avoid to ied ted “absurd legends” than the Romanian nation as such as nation Romanian the than legends” “absurd ted

onre, n their and countries, in the novels and other literature works. The territorial dispute over dispute territorial The works. literature other and novels the in , “ , neighbor, which had been previously been had which neighbor, 336 Кюстенджа

n soihn eape of example astonishing an Penakov

(Constanta) that the Romanians loved to believe in those tales that were were that tales those in believe to loved Romanians the that (Constanta) emic between the sides found its reflection not only in the historical, the in only not reflection its found sides the between emic

нското

lmd h Rmna pltcas o big nbe o preserve to unable being for politicians Romanian the blamed but also but

пристанище ad highlight and s oue ecee te ipe iis f h txs f the of texts the of limits simple the exceeded focuses , as it is thoroughly is it as , ” /

Ivan how many of the authors rapidly changed their their changed rapidly authors the of many how ing

Penakov

- consi h nbe ciiis f h bidr o the of builders the of activities noble the 90 ee ie a d at aimed were 1940 poe ht h dsue a a powerful a had dispute the that prove e

mostly blamed the Romanian official Romanian the blamed mostly

“The shelter of Kostence”, Sofia, 1918, 9 p. Sofia,1918, ofKostence”, shelter “The dered a reliable ally, and of how many many how of and ally, reliable a dered

analyzed and explained by Stancheva by explained and analyzed

original pattern of propaganda. propaganda. of pattern original . Penakov wrote in his “The his in wrote Penakov . estroying those ties ties those estroying Dobruja seen seen Dobruja 82

CEU eTD Collection the countries the power in1878after the signing Romanian The Hulme, 341 340 Berlin. Treaty the of after the province history of see 339 338 бр 337 bo approaching A disposition. and reciprocity mutual of degree a preserved regime Stambolov’s of time the in deriving from 1878, the for mortal be to turn country would which of loss the regions, Romanian significant most the national ideas and, definitely, political andeconomic propa wide myths, historical of creation past, nation’s the of moments key important used land the R lost and it to NorthernDobruja regio omania and Bulgaria took Bulgaria and omania

. 6 Кузманова Iordachi, For further details about Stambolo about details further For Adrian , Н. In order to create a general opinion on the transition of the attitude towards Dobruja Dobruja towards attitude the of transition the on opinion general a create to order In Chapter Chapter IV. / N, Genchev / N,

n (Cadrilater). Bulgarian (Cadrilater). regained Генчев, “S

Dobruj 339 t ambuloff”

Citizen Rădulescu; was neither linear, nor simple. Bulgarian aspirations towards the whole of of whole the towards aspirations Bulgarian simple. nor linear, neither was ,

“Възвръщане на Южна Добруджа към България през 1940 г” 1940 през България към Добруджа Южна на “Възвръщане

От acquired

a’s transition from the “fatal gift” “fatal the from transition a’s -

ifrn methods different “The restitution of Southern Dobruja to Bulgaria in 1940 in Bulgaria to Dobruja Southern of restitution “The rder Ньой ugra dsue bu th about dispute Bulgarian ship, Nation and State and Nation ship, , New York, 1979 New , York, public sphere. Conductors or observe or Conductors public sphere. - 340

changes, the liaisons between Bulgaria and Romania and the views over over views the and Romania and Bulgaria between liaisons the changes, o Bitolean Ion

Foreign audience and paths to modernization in the in the modernization to paths and audience Foreign до

the year the of full control over the whole province, occupying the Southern part of the the of part Southern the occupying province, whole the over control full

Крайова

part.

u, v’s policy of establishing relations with the neighboring states see Beaman A. A. Beaman see states neighboring the with relations establishing of policy v’s Inperiod 1919. the in it Kuzmanova, Kuzmanova, of the Treaty of Sanof the Stefano, one was Treaty of butit in1913when only

337 soi Dobrogei Istoria , the signing of the T the of the signing

- Building

such as attempts to associate the province with the most most the with province the associate to attempts as such 341 And each of the countries willing to legitim to willing countries the of each And

the ter the we te relations the when ,

, From Neuilly to Craiova to Neuilly From apreac o Dbua f Dobruja of appurtenance e Pittsburg, 2002 Pittsburg, ritory five yearsritory five adding later the , 338

Constanţa, Constanţa,

to the developing Romanian state into one of one into state Romanian developing the to

pres reaty of San Stefano, were less pronouncedreatyof SanStefano,were less

of 1913 of , p. p. 9 , sure.

ewe to egbrn states neighboring two between 1998, 1998,

tr h fl o Sablv an Stambolov of fall the fter

”, i ”, , Sofia,1989, , - 1940 n especially the parts dedicated to the the to dedicated parts the especially Historical review Historical , сп. ,

territory exchange betweenexchange territory

Исторически r lared up with distinct distinct with up lared s?

p – p

.17 Northern and Southern, Southern, and Northern Southern part of the ofSouthern the part

- ize its right over right its ize 20 , 1969, n. 6 1969, ,

преглед ganda of ganda Dobruja,

, 1969, , the d still 83 of of

CEU eTD Collection as a process that “affects not only the domestic development of societies but also the relations the also but societies of development domestic the only not “affects that process a as a audience. e the in them supporting of methods propagandistic chan also They countries. both of altered Dobruja see Balkans the in modernization of development bet sphere them 346 345 Europe. Southeastern Dimou, Augusta are: the in and particular, in Dobruja, studie whose authors, several 344 343 region. the “modernizing” and “administrating” of view of thepoint from meaningsbut same the in explained is opinion” 342 modernization of projects vague even often and different of zone confrontation a as viewed is territory mere the Dobruja of case the cu and social modern diversitymodernity,of ofthe of thenature afor reappraisalof the background provide societies traditional in develop they which in ways the of some and codes, and models dynamic the of aspects different of andto imitate repeat orinexistentpatternsexistent the of progress. deve the of scope the more be to out “modernity”. anticipated the to leading corridor a path, a primarily presupposes states, national two of borders the between squeezed territory, particular them”. among nd Bulgarian strategies of modernizing the region. The me The region. the modernizing of strategies Bulgarian nd

ltural orders, and of the various factors that influence the development of such diversity”. such of development the influence that factors various the of and orders, ltural S. N. S. Myron For further details on the Romanian frustration about the programs of modernization and methods of promoting promoting of methods and modernization of programs the about frustration Romanian the on details further For h mr ie o te pt laig o oent” s orwd rm h apoce ad ok ils sd b used titles work and approaches the from borrowed is modernity” to leading “path the of idea mere The In the current thesis, the notion of “public sphere”, the way it is grasped as well as the concept of “public “public of concept the as well as grasped is it way the sphere”, “public of notion the thesis, current the In see

Eisenstadt, The current chapter primarily concentrates on the propagandistic side of the Romanian Romanian the of side propagandistic the on concentrates primarily chapter current The This issue would lead to the idea, expressed by Eisenstadt: “The preceding considerations “Thepreceding Eisenstadt: by expressed idea, the to lead would issue This ,

Weiner, en ei ad oiia system political and media ween Florin

343 Grancea

, Modern

Tradition, change modernity and change Tradition, not

Entangled paths Entangled Essays in national development national in Essays oenzto o sca rltos euain o i or education, relations, social of Modernization only from the point of view of the of view of point the from only

, ization. The dynamics of growth of dynamics The ization. nie h mcaim o te oain mo Romanian the of mechanisms the Inside first chapter. The use of these concepts in the chapter presupposes the reference to the the to reference the presupposes chapter the in concepts these of use The chapter. first s proved to be extremely important for the perception of the processes happening in in happening processes the of perception the for important extremely be to proved s whole of the region of South Eastern Europe in general. Some of the works used used works the of Some general. in Europe Eastern South of region the of whole

, Budapest, 2009, Gerasimos Augustinos (ed.), (ed.), Augustinos Gerasimos 2009, Budapest, , ged lopment and the aim of modernization than a simple attempt simple a than modernization of aim the and lopment ad osrcin f rdtos te otniy f cultural of continuity the traditions, of construction and s ,

06 p 2006, from the point of view of the modernization agendas and and agendas modernization the of view of point the from 346 , Toronto, 1973, p. 203 1973, , Toronto, , p

Westport, 199 Westport, 39 . Michael edn t dvre modern diverse to leading , -

New York, 1966, p. p. 23 New1966, York, 5 Fr h gnrl vriw n h paradigms the on overview general the For 45. yes of the local and, particularl and, local the of yes

Palairet. Palairet.

344 territorial dispute in the public spheres public the in dispute territorial 1,

The notion of “modernity” itself turns itself “modernity” of notion The

re idea of modernization is perceiv is modernization of idea re dernization. The transformation of public public of transformation The dernization. h Bla Eoois . 1800 c. Economies Balkan The

Diverse paths to modernity in modernity to paths Diverse dsr, ple t one to applied ndustry, te o proposing or ities

y, the foreign foreign the y,

- 345 of the the of 1914

342 ed ed 84 In y ,

CEU eTD Collection nlss f h amnseig rjcs f h rgo i mil se a pr o te bigger the of part as seen mainly is region the of projects administering the of analysis the pointofview of representation its elites. thelocal by from Dobruja of projects modernization competing the regards primarily chapter The region. the a generated programs propagandistic two of clash a also but province, the develop and occupy claim, to Bulgaria and Romania by made effort an represent simply not does region Dobruja of transition The them. reaching of ways contradictory 2005 общество Europe. Southeastern 1919 Blagovest relations, international the in Dobruja are: region the of subject the on only not keen historians the 348 theon pla views the of investigation the but territory, the over rights the of justification the of analysis the not is chapter thisof subject. the on opinion the expressing openly texts, published leaving participati and actively debate Dobrujan individuals the to appeals generally but country, the of population the of group specific other 347 Europe. see country the modernizing of attempts Camb process complicated ofperceiving bothco of the positions the in roles significant most the of one plays projects the on influence international and debate thi For them. with connection in happening reactions, and Europe. South the of region whole the regarding efforts those of explanations the and general in mo Bulgarian already the by written materials original in the mentioned of comparison the of basis the on formed is governme Bulgarian by life to brought and constructed campaign, propagandistic

Referring to the concept of the “local elites” one does not grant it the meaning of aristocracy, bourgeoisie or any any or bourgeoisie aristocracy, of meaning the it grant not does one elites” “local the of concept the to Referring Four of the general main general the of Four

ridge University Press, 1977, 1977, Press, University ridge

Essays in national development national in Essays oee, lhuh eyn o te et o te partic the of texts the on relying although However, 348 ns of administering the province and the use of propagandistic methods previously discussed. methodspreviously ofpropagandistic the use and province the ofadministering ns Te itr o Dobruja of history The , , 1878 ,

The Dobrujan moder Dobrujan The Кузманова dividuals, dernizatio - 1939

sas n ainl development national in Essays том nts involved in the disput the in involved nts

, От

n plans in particular. It examines It particular. in plans n and the works of the authors dealing with the subject of Romanian and and Romanian of subject the with dealing authors the of works the and 2, sources used in the current part in particular and in the thesis in general in thesis the in and particular in part current the in used sources

София Ньой Sfa 2007, Sofia, ,

pp. pp. до , 2005/ , nization projects are presented are projects nization ,

, Крайова

Westport, 1991, p.1991, 15 Westport, 357 Gerasimos Augustinos Gerasimos -

Roumen unsuccessful and successful Bulgarian the of description The 370. the Romanian or Bulgarian modernization, but also on the history of history the on also but modernization, Bulgarian or Romanian the - 1940

/ Kuzmanova, Kuzmanova, /

, Sofia, 1989, 1989, Sofia, , Gerasimos e, but also but e,

Daskalov, Daskalov, ,

nd adapted specially for the modernization of modernization the for specially adapted nd Westport, 1991, 1991, Westport, - 57 Augustinos Augustinos From Neuilly to Craiova: the question of Southern Southern of question the Craiova: to Neuilly From

(ed.), (ed.), T

347 he Bulgarian society, 1878 society, Bulgarian he by Great by Нягулов untries onthe international arena. the attempts of modernizing the states the modernizing of attempts the

Diverse paths to modernity in Southeastern Southeastern in modernity to paths Diverse rao, h etra view external the reason, s ipants of the Dobrujan debate, the the debate, Dobrujan the of ipants

, (ed.), (ed.),

primarily, in the light of light the in primarily,

История o only not European powers. This chapter This powers. European Румен ies pts o oent in modernity to paths Diverse

Даскалов на

oh oain and Romanian both

Добруджа - 1939

The main objective objective main The ,

, “

, published by by published , 2 vols., Sofia, vols., 2 Българското

Njagulov, Njagulov, -

East of of East n the on events

ng in in ng 85

CEU eTD Collection the propaganda of the modernization projects, Bulgarian and Bulgarian projects, modernization the of propaganda the theinternational reaction to to attention inthe chapter Theispaid reach. they main were trying to debate territorial p the of participants the by one reflected of projects region modernization two the of clash the present to is part this of scope main The important several explain timeframesto preceding events theselected inorder uponthe touches Second War,itonly World the of outbreak the to 1913 from stretching time of period a with only deals part current the As refugees, 352 351 174 350 into 349 Dobruja, 1861. by Empire Ottoman the to migrated dramat reduced a that noted be should It 1878. in Berlin of congress the of result the as Bulgaria and Romania of control the under cult and economic its determine the preserving Still later legacy. Ottoman would its primarily, that was, development political province and economical the of characteristics important most the of One along Blackcoast. sea the both of attempts the stretching land, of piece one of and example the on economy the through nation a strategies,shape to countries modernization national their of terms the in Dobruja

ropagandistic mechanisms of modernization with not only their methods, but also with the aims the with also but methods, onlytheir not with modernization of mechanisms ropagandistic

Ibidem For further details see details further For Brian G.Williams, G.Williams, Brian t hud e oe ta te toa Epr, oee, a nt be o oe ih h sde aff sudden the with cope to able not was however, Empire, Ottoman the that noted be should It

Romani and in many cases the Christian population was obliged to host the new comers. The discontent of the the of discontent The comers. new the host to obliged was population Christian the cases many in and

351 196 a, Pittsburg, 2002 and 2002and Pittsburg, a, 352

servingas 1. ically, Dobruja remaining almost d almost remaining Dobruja ically,

Takin ural heritage of the Ottoman Empire, Dobruja, divided into two parts, came came parts, two into divided Dobruja, Empire, Ottoman the of heritage ural The Crimean Tatars Crimean The

Iordachi fter the devastating war of 1828 of war devastating the fter the g sides: the international reaction and its outcomes. factors that had led to the development of the conflict over Dobruja. over conflict the of development the to led had that factors

foundation for the large Muslim communit Muslim for thefoundation large , Rădulescu, Bitoleanu, Rădulescu, Citizenship, Nation and State and Nation Citizenship, : the diaspora experience and the forging of a nation a of forging the and experience diaspora the 350

h bget at f hs eirns ete in settled emigrants those of part biggest The Istoria Dobrogei Istoria eserted - - Building: The Integration of Northern Dobrogea Dobrogea Northern of Integration The Building: 1829 the population of the whole the of population the 1829

before the before , Romanian plans of administering of plans Romanian

Constanţa,1998 ,

and

Tatar population of Crimea of population Tatar y region. ofthe to to nlz te general the analyze

, Leiden, 2001 Leiden, ,

lux of the the of lux

region

, p. , 349 86

CEU eTD Collection “The territory fixed to Romania in 1913 as an addition of the Southern border does not re not does border Southern the of addition an as 1913 in Romania to fixed territory “The Bulgaria. and Romania of the inexistenc a Vulpe Romanianin historian, Radu cites thepublication Cadrilater of theissueof bookdedicatedto inhis region.Ungureanu George con problem future the for remises created also but outcom Great the the of decision be to out turned population mixed its with province the of division The 354 Ungureanu, 353 states Fo uprising. 1876 the of factors the of important, most the not although one, as seen be even can inhabitants Christian Dobrujan re to hoping Bulgaria, to demands its formulated had and economic their sidesterritorial problemsonopposite with Bulgaria and Romania putting War, World First the into continue would states two between arising controversies The them. preserve and regain to attempting was 1 By aims. economical and political own count competing both for clear definitely was region, the in frontiers the of establishment the of question the in Powers zag border…” R independent newly the to attributed been not had it 1878 in if existed never have would Wars, Balkan the during negotiations diplomatic of occasions the on used Cadrilater of name ephemeral Its characteristics. specific its with unit complete any

Ibidem e Vulpe See , acquiring and trying to integrate and administer the lands the administer and integrate to trying and acquiring

New York, 1967, York, New Antonina Kuz Antonina neighbor Bulgaria’s and Romania’s of role important The

r furt r Ches , Dboe mrdoaa n antichitate” in meridionala “Dobrogea 354 tiunea Cadrilaterului. Interese romanesti s romanesti Interese Cadrilaterului. tiunea her details see Williams, see details her e of the “artificial” the Dobrue of

powers that not only established the border between Romania and Bulgaria,and Romania borderbetweenthe only established not that powers manova points out that already in October 1912 the Romanian diplomacy Romanian the 1912 October in already that out points manova p ries that actively began to attract allies to one’s side in order to achieve its its achieve to order in side one’s to allies attract to began actively that ries . 129 . 353

- w dcds fe te n o te eod akn a Vle wrote: Vulpe war Balkan second the of end the after decades Two 134

The Crimean Tatars Crimean The

the “Annals of Dobruja” in1938. the “Annals once again 913

jan border, drawn by the Great drawn by border, the jan , the ,

in . nll Dobrogei Analele

aims i revizionism bulgar, 1938 bulgar, i revizionism ,

cerning Cadrilater, the Southern part of the the of part Southern the Cadrilater, cerning 213 and William Murray, William and 213 - establish the border on the line stretching stretching line the on border the establish of both countries both of omanian state…with its absurd zig absurd its state…with omanian

au XX vl I 1938, I, vol. XIX, anul , , while , s as well as that of the Great the of that as well as s Vulpe underlinesVulpe theidea - Bulgaria 1940 were opposite: opposite: were

powers and imposed on andpowers imposedon The making of the Balkan the of making The , Bucuresti, 2005, p. 15 p. 15 2005, Bucuresti, ,

.1 ctd in cited 1, p. losing and and losing Romania e of the the of e present present 87 -

CEU eTD Collection integrate the territory in the country as successfully as possible, to guarantee its status within the within status its guarantee to possible, as successfully as country the in territory the integrate They party. rival the negat factors, religious or heritage cultural past, historical the of interpretations vi side Romanian the and are Bulgarian the enabling propaganda of materials chapter particular this in projects modernization The p initiated, party Bulgarian and Romanian the them, around developing polemics, the and sides both from land the over rights the justify Silistra. including sea, Black the to Tutrakan from 94 359 358 възраждане Нашето sociala politica, country. their in Seisanu, are: integration them of Dobruja’s Some legitimize to be try rather would who type similar 20s, of work the Bulgarian in debates the of participants Romanian 357 1913 allies the warbetween междусъюзническата Hungar 356 355 neighborthan its economi better much a in not was gains, territorial achieving Bulgaria unlike and war rule”. Ottoman the under been had asno more onthe exampleofBulgaria Palairetit or “in1910wasurban explains little that status” “peripherytheir overcome primarilyto had Bulgaria and Romaniaboth view of point this trust as Romania or Bulgaria present could also but region, the developing of plans serious the of “evidence” the only not perfect model ofadministering theland. prove practically to borders, new

Palairet, Кузманова H. Eric H. bu t About The The , usa n is miin rgrig orj see Dobruja regarding ambitions its and Russia y, Therefore, the “modernization” arg “modernization” the Therefore, importance of the “modernization” argument appears in several publications authored especially by by especially authored publications several in appears argument “modernization” the of importance

Aldcroft,

e eiie oe f h “Great the of role decisive he Th , e Balkan Economies, Balkan e A, ,

Op prelucrare de de prelucrare . 359 Europe’s third world. The European periphery i periphery European The world. third Europe’s . , cit

София. 1917/Chingirov, 1917/Chingirov, София. война

p also also , Veliko Turnovo, 1985 , Turnovo, Veliko p Dobrogea, gu Dobrogea, 22 .

1913 allow - 23 cain aen, on Ionescu, N Ioan Valeanu, Octavian worthy allies for the countries whose side they would support. From From support. would theyside whose countries the for allies worthy

Cambridge, 1977, Cambridge,

, Велико ed the parties to apply the the apply to parties the ed t he legi he 358

rile Dunarii si insula Serpilor insula si Dunarii rile oes ad oai’ atmt t blne ewe Fac, Austria France, between balance to attempts Romania’s and Powers”

Търново Romania, although taking part only in the Second Balkan Second the in only part taking although Romania,

Dobruja. Our revival Our Dobruja. published in 1913 in published timacy of the borders to Great to borders the of timacy ument became ument

rimarily, to attract the Great the attract to rimarily,

p. p. , 1985/ Stefan 1985/ , 367

Стефан

355

Moreover, with the diplomatic attemp diplomatic the with Moreover, -

1920, and then before the Second World War. World Second the before then and 1920, one of the most important. most the of one Анчев

n the interwar years interwar the n Anchev, , Sofia,1917. ,

Constanta, 1925, 1925, Constanta, oenzn picpe i odr to order in principles modernizing , Bucuresti, 1928, 1928, Bucuresti, , , Политиката ewed as extremely important important extremely as ewed The policy of royal Romania and and Romania royal of policy The

s to focus to s

Powers to one’s side. one’s to Powers Powers by present by Powers , Aldershot, 200 Aldershot, ,

на Чингиров, Dobrogea:

кралска

not only on the on only not ively depicting depicting ively 357

c position c Itgranted economica, Румъния Добруджа Добруджа 6, 6,

than it it than pp ing a a ing ts to ts . 39 . 356 the 88

и - -

CEU eTD Collection reaction of countr both in situation economic general the countries, two the of projects modernization competing the thoroughlydescribing Before Romania. foras well asBulgaria, for issue motivatinga waswhich r Romanian and Bulgarian the modernizatio the to connected in efforts significant putting while “backwardness” Rausser 365 364 development 363 Forschungen 362 Keith see case Romanian historio Balkans: the in nation a 361 1914, World no The neighbors. Western their to compared countries the in situation economical the characterize primarily 1940 and 1913 between Bulgaria 360 better a up build to managed Bulgaria However, smallholders. by mostly cultivated being land unsuccessful people leads, freedom sowedhave invain. thenWe is forth.” such roses, come thorns only but like stained If swamp…! thedustin rollin we and now clouds, the eagles above high “We country: his of liberation the after decades two almost disappointment his gives Bell John Stefano. San of treaty the from remaining aspiration territorial the fulfill and progress undoubted the reach to disability its to connected much very were facing was Bulgaria problems Awakening national Greek the to

Ibidem John Bell John nationa the of view the on details further For Roumen o ute eal ntetasto fteBlainarclua eom see reforms agricultural Bulgarian the of transition the on details further For The terms of “underdevelopment” and and “underdevelopment” of terms The

, Cambridge, 1982 Cambridge,

a quotation from the writer and political activist Mikhalaki Georgiev, who would express would who Georgiev, Mikhalaki activist political and writer the from quotation a Stanford, 2000 and Ivan Berend, and György Ranki, Ranki, György and Berend, Ivan and 2000 Stanford, , This aspect of “underdevelopment” of aspect This Bulgaria failed to achieve industrialization, its agricultural reforms turned out to be rather be to out turned reformsagricultural its industrialization, achieve to failed Bulgaria roots its owes tradition” “modernization Bulgarian the generally that explains Bell John Disruption and continuity in Bulgaria's agrarian reform agrarian Bulgaria's in continuity and Disruption

D , , W

,1998, 57, in Gerasimos Augustinos Augustinos Gerasimos in Great ies with their aspirations expressed by the participants of the territorial debate and the the and debate territorial the of participantsthe by expressed aspirations their with ies askalov, 365

the modernization of education and culture, as it becomes clear from the roots of of roots the from clear becomes it as culture, and education of modernization the estport, p 1991, estport,

and did not solve the majo not and did

Powers should beshould examined Powers

“

, 208, p. Development in the Balkan Periphery Prior to World War II: Some Reflections” Some II: War World to Prior Periphery Balkan the in Development

Hitchins, in ae any orwd from borrowed mainly are tions

p . 16 . rpy f h Blain revival Bulgarian the of graphy

The The

- 17 evival, (ed.), (ed.), Romanians, 1774 Romanians,

n ltr o h ifune rm Russia. from influence the to later and bcwrns” sd n hs chapter this in used “backwardness” Diverse paths to modernity in Southeastern Europe. Essays in national national in Essays Europe. Southeastern in modernity to paths Diverse 361 lism in in lism

r problems of the agriculture like low state support and state support like low agriculture ofthe r problems 360 oenzto was modernization .

forc Romania and Bulgaria see Bulgaria and Romania - 1866 ed both countries to attempt to overcome their overcome to attempt to countries both ed The European Periphery and Industrialization 1780 Industrialization and Periphery European The nrw Janos, Andrew , Oxford, 1996 Oxford, , ,

Berkley, 1994. Berkley, Bdps, 04 fr oe information some for 2004, Budapest, , copne b nationalism, by accompanied

at Cen East

Roumen Robert F. Robert when referring to Romania and and Romania to referring when tral Europe in the Modern Modern the in Europe tral

porm. Being programs. n

Daskalov this is the life a free free a life the is this

Lyons, and and Lyons, 363

y 1913 By , The making of of making The

Gordon C Gordon in

Südost on the the on ,

364 the 362 89 - -

CEU eTD Collection the industrial or agricultural sector, while no influential foreign bank wished to invest into the the into invest to wished bank foreign influential no while sector, agricultural or industrial the Bulgaria.trust in Great from lit and defeat country’s the by clarified extent some to be can war Balkan Second the t economic and social achieve to time same the at failing 1891, of reform the following system educational 1939 371 370 1926. 20s, the from publication 369 368 367 development 366 Do including territories, forces”. “nobilitarian “ Macedonian dilemma wasactual still for Bulgaria after1913. the country, the for significant politically and economically most the called be hard can which question, Dobrujan the for Except stability. economic country’s the destroying almost Balkans”, the of Prussia “the Bulgaria made Neuilly individuals of treaty the after trained even purposes the of majority the leaving unemployed. afford, could state the than specialists infrastructure. Bulgar unpredictable and unsecure h pritne f t of persistence the

Bell Bell R. John John Даскалов o furt For , 2 vol., Sofia, 2005), p Sofia,2005), ,vol., 2

, ,

Bell, Bell, Diverse paths, paths, Diverse paths Diverse Bulgarian newly established banking system was not able to sponsor the development of development the sponsor to able not was system banking established newly Bulgarian The Macedonian issue, as well as the Dobrujan dispute only dispute Dobrujan the as well as issue, Macedonian The

Lampe, her details on the Macedonian question in the Bulgarian politics and its general significance, see the the see significance, general its and politics Bulgarian the in question Macedonian the on details her , Westport, 1991, p. 19 p. 1991, , Westport, , ransformations.

in Gerasimos Au Gerasimos in Българското oes N Powers. 368 367

The Bulgarian economy in the twentieth century twentieth the in economy Bulgarian The The mili The

h scesu euainl rga b 12 cery rdcd oe trained more produced clearly 1920 by program educational successful The , pp. pp. , Westport,

370 e l rgm” pltcl n clua lf dmntd y premodern by dominated life cultural and political regime”, old he 19 Georgi Georgi vrhls, hr exi there evertheless, p

b . . 28 общество In the meantime, Bulgaria had to cope with the migrants from the lost the from migrants the with cope to had Bulgaria meantime, the In - tarist tendencies and tendencies tarist ruja. 20 gustinos (ed.), (ed.), gustinos 366 -

29 1991, p. 19 1991,

Bazhdarov 371

The successes as well as the fails of Bulgarian modernization after modernization Bulgarian of fails the as well as successes The

Their influx also damaged the u the damaged also influx Their , 1878 , ian project dealing with the improvement of the state’s state’s the of improvement the with dealing project ian

Diverse paths to modernity in Southeastern Europe. Essays in national in Essays Europe. Southeastern in modernity to paths Diverse .

- a uestion mac donienne dans le pass et le et pass le dans donienne mac uestion a 1939 ,

td ipe raos o Great for reasons simpler sted том

the great amount of money spent money of amount great the 369

2, 2,

София

. , 2005/Daskalov, 2005/Daskalov, , NewYork nstable economic balance of the of balance economic nstable , 1986 ,

highlighted what Bell called Bell what highlighted , p T p he Bulgarian society, 1878 society, Bulgarian he . 28 .

P - 36 owers not to have have to not owers present

on the military the on ,

tle support tle 2. ed. 2. Sofia 90 ly ly - ,

CEU eTD Collection 1918. A small state with a large number number large a with state small A 1918. ab an to connected partially were problems neighbor its as well as reform agricultural proper a out carry to inability and 1907 in revolt peasant bloody a reforms 1919 in Union Agrarian the of power to ascend the After country. 377 376 375 374 21) 373 p 2011, Budapest, 372 deat Bratianu’s 20 the of century. beginning the in population urban the of percentage the in increase significant a a liter verylevelcountryfrom of with a low frustration and crisis. nonexistent. pe the it. thatcould class promote middle lack the of Romania foundinternal its politicalandeconomical mechanisms under threat. program. modernization territorie new With region. the in states biggest the of one become already had 1930 in Romania borders,

Ibidem. Ibidem MaryEllen Maria For further details see details further For , o furth For

London,1930 Romania’s path to “progress” was slightly different from the Bulga from the“progress” Romania’s slightly pathwas different to Like Bulgaria, Romania had its rather successful educational reform that transformed it it transformed that reform educational successful rather its had Romania Bulgaria, Like Li

snr rmie eteey or ad t and poor, extremely remained asantry Bucur 377 gradually royalinto turned

s, the country inherited also the ethnic minorities that would turn into a challenge for its for challenge a into turn would that minorities ethnic the also inherited country the s,

ke Bulgaria ke

r eal se Daskalov see details er y 90 fe svrl vns ht a ifune te onr lk Pie Minister Prime like country the influenced had that events several after 1940 By

, 376 Fischer 373 .

Eugenics and modernization in interwar Romania interwar in modernization and Eugenics

. 88 . e needed that country The Romania was not in a much better position compared to compared position better much a in not was Romania and the ascent to power of the P the of power to ascent the and , - in in 120

, David Diverse paths, paths, Diverse

Romania was not able to achieve industrializati achieve to able not was Romania

374

Mitrany

eann Bsaai, uoia n svrl te provinces, other several and Bucovina Bessarabia, Regaining

, eaig h ps. oen ugra his Bulgarian Modern past. the Debating . Westport, 1991, 140 p. 1991, Westport,

- The land & the peasant in Rumania; the war and agrarian reform (1917 reform agrarian and war the Rumania; in peasant the & land The military dictatorship afterend interwar period.military dictatorship theof the of Romanian of solutely opposite event opposite solutely acy in the 1870s to a comparatively literate state with comparativelythe 1870stoa with state literate acy in teey at eom was reforms fast xtremely 375

The The easant - upper 145. he - speaking populations speaking , 2002. , Pittsburgh,

lcl entrepreneurs “local” arty le arty - class landowners held the land class landowners ad by Iuliu Maniu, Romania as as Romania Maniu, Iuliu by ad – oy fo Sablv o Zhiv to Stambolov from tory:

the growth of its territory in territory its of growth the 372 on as on

Bulgaria

rian one. Experiencing rian one. et n stain of situation a in left Bulgaria

well, facing a severe a facing well,

living not within its its within not living

a , however, its however, , we tr eis of series fter e almost re , while

kov 91 th - ,

CEU eTD Collection Bulgarian and Romanian par Romanian and Bulgarian create partially and on dependent very itself, context the from clear becomes it as was, claims justifying of process wou supremacy also asa royal faced Bulgaria as well 379 378 Ro Greater blooming the of period The revealed. ever have would H the region. whole the in flourishing navigation the established, beingConstanta, port, new the being built, bridges new the lists He region. the of modernization active the to appealing by argument his las the in progress achieved German or French Romanian, on only opinions his basing Seisanu, Romulus 1928 in published book 1940. and 1913 between period su “evident the was argument main Romanian the in territories losing Bulgaria and acquiring Romania several texts. published al had that itself audience local the the by to transmitted message communities foreign the also but audience, local the to references hand, one the on presupposes, aiming were time same the Romani in published works the even However, place. first owever, the efforts to “civilize” and “build” Dobruja cost Romania much more than the author the than more much Romania cost Dobruja “build” and “civilize” to efforts the owever,

Ibidem. Seisanu, Both Bulgaria and Romania, unable to hand to unable Romania, and Bulgaria Both vrtig ht s etoe b Siau os not does Seisanu by mentioned is that Everything by defined mainly was texts Bulgarian and Romanian the between difference The - language sources, came with the direct opinion: “…this territory would have never never have would territory “…this opinion: direct the with came sources, language

Dobrogea, gurile Dunarii si insula Serpilor siinsula Dunarii gurile Dobrogea, 379

- military dictatorship. ld look for allies among Great among allies for look ld d by the international reaction. Texts, written in French or German by by German or French in written Texts, reaction. international the by d

the stagnation of its industrial its of stagnation the

t 50 years without being united to Romania”. to united being without years 50 t ticipants of the debates debates the of ticipants

much higher. This strategy can be seen as double, which which double, as seen be can strategy This higher. much

ccess” of the Romanian administrative policy. In a a In policy. administrative Romanian the of ccess” , Bucuresti, 1928, 210 p. 1928, Bucuresti, ,

Powers, trying to attract them on their side. The side. their on them attract to trying Powers, le the whole of Dobruja by purely individual individual purely by Dobruja of whole the le definitely refer definitely ization program and later entered later and program ization an or Bulgarian for the local p local the for Bulgarian or an

seem to contradict the reality. reality. the contradict to seem mania came to an end in 1940, 1940, in end an to came mania

red to foreign audience i audience foreign to red 378 ready received it from from it received ready

The author supports author The

ublic, at ublic, the war war the n the the n

92 of

CEU eTD Collection mod everything else. and history language, faith, in “united” completely as country the of citizens the presents that Romani the on inscription the to referring by possible, as developed and united growing as look its to wish face this to explains Livezeanu had Irina problems. finally country the in situation political and economical the when 383 382 381 1930 380 influential an by expressed is issue the time This Romanians”. “civilizing of idea same the pathmodernity.development onits to oftheregion is legacy Ottoman the and agriculture before its region developing started steppe first infertile Romanians the was “deserted” how out Pointing 1919. in published French his in Quadrilatere” Le meridionale. “Dobroudja of author the by shared as authors the by viewed “successful modernizers”whohave province. tosave come the are Romanians the paper: current the of scope the for important interests”. economic its of argued zone or supported be the can affirmation of out remained province the Ottomans the for inexistent…because almost was sea Black the on and Delta Danube the in commerce the rule non its from comes Bulgaria) unlike non as viewed clearly is (Romania dominion Balkan a be cannot Dobruja that proof “a

Ibidem Dobroudja “ a Seisanu, Irina Livezeanu, Livezeanu, Irina , 1995, 1 ,p. 1995, ernity. He does not mention Bulgarian modernization projects in general, pointing out that out pointing general, in projects modernization Bulgarian mention not does He ernity. Seisanu clearly attempts to present the same picture of Romania bringing Dobruja to to Dobruja bringing Romania of picture same the present to attempts clearly Seisanu Nicolae IorgaNicolae inhis Roma the of role on the viewsame the that almost noticedbe It should , p Dobrogea p . 6 -

380

meridionalle Cultural politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, Nation Building and Et and Building Nation Regionalism, Romania: Greater in politics Cultural

, seen as backward, and Bulgarians are generally seen as a danger to the stabile stabile the to danger a as seen generally are Bulgarians and backward, as seen

p p

.210 - 211 .Quadrilatere”, e “What do we represent in Dobruja?” attracts the inDobruja?” represent dowe “What

- distant future, when Turks ruled over over ruled Turks when future, distant

for

an pavilion of the New York International exhibition exhibition International York New the of pavilion an Paris, 1919, p 1919, Paris, , however, one however, , 383

p . . 4

ae t bosmn province. blossoming a it made - 5

of its aspect seems to be extremely be to seems aspect its of

it. Under the Turkish the Under it. audience attention to nian governmentis hnic Struggle, 1918 Struggle, hnic - language work work language 381 - 382 Balkan

The The 93 -

CEU eTD Collection civilized mission. Generallmission. civilized their ancestors. again. once region whole the civilize to descendantswere whose “modernity”and to Dobruja broughtonce had who the in lived ever had that nation Ancient most “the Romans, the with region the developing time his of Romanians the compares who historian, 386 10. 385 p munte,1910, Valenii de 384 Western the for public. specially written being of idea pronounced more much a having West, the war. Balkan Second the of devastations the overcoming “imperialistic”, policy I general. in Dobruja of and then suppo Sud” powers. of diminishment and defense of tactics th influence to able wasn’t it if facts the than audience, foreign the of view of point historian recognized a or Independent one. international the t was also much more prepared for handling the Southern part of Dobruja. Calling Romanian Calling Dobruja. of part Southern the handling for prepared more much also was t

Pen Penacoff

Iorga acoff, , “ , h t The Penakov, one of the activep the of onePenakov,

pointed Ce represintam in Dobrogea?”idei din conferinta tinuta in ziua de 11 ianuar 1910 de Nic de 1910 ianuar 11 de ziua in tinuta conferinta din Dobrogea?”idei in represintam Ce , Le problem Le Le problem de la Dobroudja de Sud. Un aspect econ aspect Un Sud. de Dobroudja la de problem Le rted hree works represent an inverse transition of one idea of Romanians having the the having Romanians of idea one of transition inverse an represent works hree

Bratianu’s opinion of the extreme risk of occupying first the Northern Dobruja, Dobruja, Northern the first occupying of risk extreme the of opinion Bratianu’s

out that Romania generally todeal slightthewhole out thatvery ofhow with had notion 384 ,

p. 13 p. p Apparently, Romanians, according to Iorga, had to repeat the successes of successes the repeat to had Iorga, to according Romanians, Apparently, 385 . 6 386 -

7 Bulgarian perspective, however, did n did however, perspective, Bulgarian

– eao wud cainly ee t Blai’ rcn scess in successes recent Bulgaria’s to refer occasionally would Penakov

y, this message y,oriented was this

the main scope of justifying the rights was more adequate from the the from adequate more was rights the justifying of scope main the

ly articipants of the debate, the of articipants

from the personality of the author author the of personality the from em. The Bulgarian picture, however, logically shows the the shows logically however, picture, Bulgarian The em. the from from “Romanian modernizing r modernizing “Romanian region”, “the modernizing nation”, the people, people, the nation”, modernizing “the region”, that of the local one that simply had to accept to had simply that one local the of that omique et social dec e problem e dec social et omique

not only not His

defensive tactics mainly appealed mainly tactics defensive in “Le probleme de “Leprobleme in ot only offer only ot

to the local audience, but also audience,but local the to – ole” in the eyes of Great of eyes the in ole”

a n a on

the whole program. whole the - famous journalist journalist famous

, Paris, 1928, 1928, Paris, , la Dobroudja de de Dobroudja la olae Iorga, olae p p. 6 p.

94 to to to - ,

CEU eTD Collection necessa deprived country a 1913 in Bulgaria making Romania, to cede its after artificially highlighted B Asparukh prince of time the from already life Ishirkov exp and rights historical Ishirkov 391 390 389 388 387 to the questionof Dobruja totheforeignaudience. t of significantpart the of thestrongerexplains orientation attitude This mistake. intolerable an asviewed Cadrilateris cede necessitythe to accepted, be while could still part Northern the of better much with modernizers better reg of idea the and assimilation to value more of of being Bessarabia measures drastic Romanian of description the with deals work the Mostly modernization. its of also, but itself, region the of only not fate the Penakov, t on later focuses work the region, the over Bulgaria congress”. Berlin the after Dobroudja “natural” and successful modernizerpossible of theSouthern part region, of the more being Bulgaria of concept balanced extremely an present to lain o te ae f t on rda dvlpet Truhu hs ok h author the work his Throughout development. gradual own its of sake the for ulgarian

Ibidem Ibidem, Markov, Ischirkoff Ischirkoff, o i vee a te rl” of “rule” the as viewed is ion n 1919 In ry for the pass of progress. Ishirkov progress. of pass the for ry

, p. 31, See the whole4. theofchapter See 31, p. ,

pointed out the importance of Dobruja of importance the out pointed n i “e blae e Dboda wud hr simil share would Dobroudja” en bulgares “Les his in p The political fate of of Dobr fate political The p , p

. 2 Les bulgares en Dobroudja. Aper Dobroudja. en bulgares Les that p - . 134 . 24 ,

the Dobruja organization in Sofia published published Sofia in organization Dobruja the orj’ ntrl development natural Dobruja’s - 170

of the region is definitely considered unjust in all the regarded sources, it it sources, regarded the all in unjust considered definitely is region the of

erience than to concrete modernization projects of the Bulgarian s Bulgarian the of projects modernization concrete to than erience

oudja after the Berlin congress Berlin the after oudja the te degraded”, “the -

grounded claims. It should be noted that although the loss loss the although that noted be should It claims. grounded 389 Ro cu historique et eth et cu historique

Beginning with the emphasis on the on emphasis the with Beginning mania

generally used Romanian and French sources, trying sources, French and Romanian used generally

n for the Bulgarian social, cultural and economic and cultural social, Bulgarian the for ,

387 n is w pt t mdriy were modernity to path own its and state than Dobruja than state

391

he question he n sae ta te ein a to had region the that stated and

at least. hl Blain ae rsne a much as presented are Bulgarians while nographique ,

Sofia,1919. 388 Markov’s , touched upon by Ishirkov by upon touched ,

r ocps referring concepts, ar ,

Berne, 1919, p. 180 p. 1919, Berne,

390 he Bulgarian texts related Bulgarianhetexts . Romanian rule over the over rule Romanian . “The political fate of of fate political “The

historical rights of rights historical

of its lands, its of

to more

broken broken remain

ide. ide. and and 95

CEU eTD Collection from Bulgaria having of idea Bulgaria’s against failed. TurkeyCondominium.as the of control the cameunder Dobruja well, as part Northern the get to hoping and 1916, in Dobruja fi Germany, way, this In Bulgaria. and Romania dispute, the on play to possibilities the and Dobruja of value strategic the on opinion its based predominantly sides, taking of task the facing however, audience, foreign The 395 24 394 19 in Dobruja Northern 1917 393 392 beginning the by borders its within happening events the by concerned more was Ital Berthelot”. citizen Romanian a but army, occupational that general Bulgarian the before say would Romania, in men Kuzmanova Antonina yearsregainedwith Cadrilater, and lost later. several however Turtu lost Romania 1916 In sea. the to access easy and Balkans the of middle the in position strategic its of because Dobruja. occupying troops German the and Romania on war declaring Bulgaria to led decision this Later Germany. and took finally involved,

- Ungureanu, Ungureanu, Kuzmanova, Kuzmanova, Кузманова 25 See y However, each of the countries had countries the of each However,

would take the side of Romania, although thesidewould take much less pro being година

Димитров Romania, support Romania, War, World First the During , did not approve of Bulgaria’s ideas of taking the whole of Dobruja, leaving the state state the leaving Dobruja, of whole the taking of ideas Bulgaria’s of approve not did , , , Chestiunea Cadrilaterului. Interese romanesti s romanesti Interese Cadrilaterului. Chestiunea Варна От From Neuilly From ,

and Germany not expectingand toincrease Germany borders. thestate not its ,

Ньой Австро 1984/ , caia and than Silistra, suffering heavy suffering Silistra, than and caia 17

до , Varna, , 1984

h ie ftodfeet lcs ugrasdn wt Austria with siding Bulgaria blocks, different two of sides the -

Крайова унгарската , Dimitrov ed mainly by France, established France, by mainly ed

p. 30 p. tions that general Berthelot, the commander of the troops of the allies allies the of troops the of commander the Berthelot, general that tions 393

/ Germa ,

Kuzmanova,

the whole of the region, Turkey region, the of whole the Austro

дипломация both Romania and Bu and Romania both y aprnl, a itrse i Blai as Bulgaria in interested was apparently, ny, - ugra dpoay n te Bulgarian the and diplomacy Hungarian a series a From N From

of conditions to offer to Romania. While Russia Russia While Romania. to offer to conditions of българо euilly to Craiova to euilly i revizionism bulgar, 1938 bulgar, i revizionism 394 r t si st

- 395 грманският

ig ih ugra gained Bulgaria, with ding

full control over the province in 1919. 1919. in province the over control full defeats. Austrian and German forces, forces, German and Austrian defeats. She later adds that Brita that adds later She lgaria, initially lgaria, “ he is not a commander of one one of commander a not is he , Sofia, 1989, p.25 Sofia,1989, , well as Germany in 1918 turned 1918 Germanyin as well still hoping for territorial gains territorial forhoping still

- спор Romanian than France.Romanian

за 392 -

1940

северна trying to av to trying

- emn ipt about dispute German y 98 No 1918, By balancing between between balancing , Bucuresti, 2005, p 2005, Bucuresti, ,

Добруджа in as well as well as in

of the 20s, 20s, the of - being oid Southern Southern Hungary an r

thern

ally през 96 p , .

CEU eTD Collection the borders. to chance any had hardlycountry allies. getting in concerned more was Bulgaria while side, its on France, Dobruja, of whole the with remained officially Romania countin anti pronounced with country only the was France 1940 397 Lenuta 396 methods propagandistic trustworthy and known already using and hand one the on goals policy of idea the combined parties both from Dobruja administering of projects the Generally, could. possibly they as successfully as state the of borders the into region the of whole the integrate to attemptedBulgaria and Romania Both how powerful were.andcountries trustworthy bothofthe demonstrate primarily could disputes and projects Romanian or Bulgarian Hence, expectations. capabi the of idea the with but development, regional of projects or claims territorial Romanian or Bulgarian with acquainted get to order in not them proof as Powers regarded primarily were region the in Bulgarians or Romanians of achievements possible The projects. modernization their by as well as sides both by published texts the by

For For o frhr eal o Rmna atmt t hnl Dbua ni 14 se Florica see 1940 until Dobruja handle to attempts Romanian on details further For ass to hard is It ,Bucures Nicolescu, further details see Ungureanu, Ungureanu, see details further g on Romania as its main and main its as Romania on g

ti, 2005, p 2005, ti,

Armata romana de la ultimatum la la dictat la ultimatum de romana Armata

of the state of affairs in two debating countries. Foreign audience had to grasp to had audience Foreign countries. debating two in affairs of state the of ert that the international attitude towards th towards attitude international the that ert p

. . 23 - 2. 30

Administering Dobruja: foreign goals policy and

Chestiunea Cadrilaterului. Interese romanesti s romanesti Interese Cadrilaterului. Chestiunea

influence significantly Great significantly influence propagan

most trustworthy ally in South Eastern Europe. After 1919 1919 After Europe. Eastern South in ally trustworthy most attracting the foreign audience and achieving foreign foreign achieving and audience foreign the attracting distic methods applied. –

anul 1940. Documente 1940. anul - Bulgarian orientation of the foreign policy, policy, foreign the of orientation Bulgarian iis f hs to tts o ufl their fulfill to states two these of lities

396 e Dobrujan dispute was dispute Dobrujan e

Powers t a sil aig t mi ally, main its having still was it , Bucuresti, 2002, vol. II vol. Bucuresti, , 2002, so that they could reshape could they that so i revizionism bulgar, 1938 bulgar, revizionism i

397 Dob

eoe 90 the 1940, Before re, Vasilica Manea, Manea, Vasilica re,

by t by

influenced influenced he Great he - III.

97 -

CEU eTD Collection Turkish rule”, according to the author, Dobruja was an extremely backward province backward extremely an was Dobruja author, the to according rule”, Turkish Romanians. the by capture its before region the of backwardness the describing the country quickly ingeneral, as as possible. modernizing by so do to readiness their show least at or Dobruja modernize to had Romania and region’s the of modernization view of point the From etc. rights natural legacy, historical to referring like State and Nation 402 401 400 399 398 below on living a out eked whom of most peasantry, values: and experiences cultural and educational, social, economic, political, in differing worlds separate two of consisted country “the that article her in out point Fischer situa general the that noted be should it Dobruja, of development the in money investing and infrastructure their expressed Northernits decades partgained several before Romaniafullcontrol whole over territory. the ofannexation the startingwith colonization Dobrujan rathervictorious the processof the of costs 1877 of war veterans ofthe He part. Southern the in later and Northern the province” the of fields “deserted the appealing the of role the underlines primarily author The “their and Romans the

Culea,p Culea, Culea, Culea For further de further For Apostol D. Culea in his book abou book his in Culea D. Apostol , majorit the Although

Cat trebuie Cat p p p. p p . 148 . 13 . to rather successful Romanian educational reforms educational Romanian successful rather to

240 tion with the country’s modernizing policy was far from being bright. Mary Ellen Mary bright. being from far was policy modernizing country’s the with tion - - 18 tails on the integration of of integration the on tails

Building, Building, - hssrtg a ob lee,aotn h oino sces.Bt Bulgaria Both “success”. of notion the adopting altered, be to had strategy this 160

opinion, highlighting Romania’s involvement in the building of the region’s region’s the of building the in involvement Romania’s highlighting opinion,

sa stie oricine despre Dobrogea despre stieoricine sa

Pittsburg,2002 descendants, the Romanians” had come to care for the fate of the region. region. the of fate the for care to come had Romanians” the descendants, - 1878 was not as brillian notas 1878 was

f h Rmna cneprre o th of contemporaries Romanian the of

Northern Dobruja Northern 401

by the Romanians is seen is Romanians the by t Dobruja published in 1928, dedicated some pages to pages some dedicated 1928, in published Dobruja t ,

Bucuresti, 1928. Bucuresti, admits that the idea of bringing to the region the the region the to bringing of idea the that admits el opened newly ’s incorporation in Romania in incorporation ’s t asit - ussec hlig, n a urbanized an and holdings, subsistence had seemed to be, recognizing the recognizing the be, to seemed had

. 400

oain col i Dobruja, in schools Romanian

Moreover, t Moreover, as the greatest succe greatest the as

see see Dbua dispute Dobrujan e

the rural Romanian rural the he colonization of colonization he Iordachi 398

“Under the “Under , Citize 399 ss first in first ss , while , ns high high 402 hip, hip, 98

CEU eTD Collection strategy that later became rather oppressive. rather became later that strategy a of establishment the for reason the extent some to explains fact This state. any modernize ever off one Without modernization. achieve to order in by out carried by livingminorities ethnic inthe country. thenumerous “ its achieve to wished primarily Romania Dobruja, of Europe”. Eastern in cosmopolitan most the probably was that aristocracy 407 406 M, Zaharieff, see furtherdetails For Zahariev. whomis ofone of Bulgari several point by presented is opposite 20s the the in policy whilecolonization Romanian the Dobrogea, of “horrors” in the about view population Bulgarian the of “behavior” the about complaints expresses 405 Dobruja of thehistory about administration Romanian the of establishment the against Dobruja in population the Добрудж Добруджа see authorities, 404 403 the by liberators as and authorities Romanian the by terrorists as Regarded state. Bulgarian the Bulgarian promoted organization authorities. coexisted government population. local 1919 in policyDobruja Romanian in the describing while Njaguov, Blagovest territory. the over control administrative establish to was wellby rather described contemporaries. its which colonization, and Romanization of policy the of continuation the by achieved be could united ethnically the with connected

Ibidem Нягулов Fischer See M, M, See As a proof of the conflicts between the Bulgarian population of the Southern Dobruja and the Romanian Romanian the and Dobruja Southern the of population Bulgarian the between conflicts the of proof a As However, one should notice that the “unification” was one of the programs that had to be to had that programs the of one was “unification” the that notice should one However, The Romanian strategies were working rather well in Dobru in well rather working were strategies Romanian The a,

in Augustinos, Gerasimos (ed.), (ed.), Augustinos,Gerasimos in срещу

, Roman София

407 История “

Бюлетин cie n oten orj utl 90 h Itra Dbua revolutionary Dobrujan Internal the 1940 until Dobruja Southern in Active

настаняването , 1992, p. 433 p. 1992, , “ 406 rdtsu bla i Dobrogea”, in bulgar Iredntismul

на

h illegal The

Добрудж № 1 1 №

, Sofia,1992 ih h opesos f h non the of oppressions the with / на Bulletin n. 1 of the Sofia’s representative s representative Sofia’s the of 1 n. Bulletin

на

Софийското a/

румънката Njagulov Njagulov

nationalistic ideas and fought for the inclusion of the land in in land the of inclusion the for fought and ideas nationalistic ugra ognztos tugig again struggling organizations Bulgarian Diverse paths, paths, Diverse - 1940, points out that the life was far from being safe for the beingthe safefor far from was the life that points out 1940,

tts f h cuty Fo te oain ie hs aim this side Romanian the From country. the of status The history of Dobruja of history The

представителство администрация 404

nll Dobro Analele 405 Romania’s as well as Bulgaria’s modernity was modernity Bulgaria’s as well as Romania’s Westport, 1991, p. 142 1991, Westport,

“ Les minorities bulgares en Roumanie en bulgares minorities Les national integrity”, which was put at stake at put was which integrity”, national , 1919 ,

на , Sofia, 2007, p. 293 Sofia,2007, , gei

ЦДНС ”

13, p 1935, , published in in published - eat of the CDNS about the resistance of of resistance the about CDNS the of eat Romanian population by the the by population Romanian

icial language, nobody could could nobody language, icial за ja, while the state was trying was state the while ja,

съпротиватана p , 1919”, published in in published 1919”, , 20 . 403 Извори -

3 h ato generally author The 23 Regarding the whole the Regarding

t h Romanian the st

за

историята ”, Paris, 1940 Paris, ”, населението an authors, authors, an Sources Sources

99 на

CEU eTD Collection the state became fully ruled from Bucharest. from ruled fully became state the party Romania. of the into integration its Balkans. and the of republic federative independence projected Dobrujan of idea the supporting was that 1925 theDo also committees establishedrevolution the Bulgarian party. communist Bulgarian the of influence the under fell later they side, Bulgarian 411 410 time”s modern in unity Balkan toward movement the of history 409 history Bulgarian in 1919” before movement liberation national Dobrujan the in conflicts and trends ideological революция). социалистическата до конгрес Берлинския след въпрос г” 1919 до движение освободително 408 applied intheand period d 1940.Dobrujan between 1913 triumphant its of size accomplishments. the exaggerated simply they modernization, Dobrujan the of course a information the alter not did debates the of participants Romanian the of texts the that noted be should It territory. its of modernization quick the with cope hardly could that Romania partial the being one other the infrastructure, in investment and colonization centralization, of plan successful the being autonomy and po larger a offering when decentralization the with coincided which country, the of centralization consi that (judet) territorial the

Нягулов Livezeanu, For further details on the Balkan federalism and its projects see projects its and federalism Balkan the on details further For For

further The power, in general, had become extremely centralized in Romania and for this reason this for and Romania in centralized extremely become had general, in power, The ugras oenzn poet, nie h Rom the unlike projects, modernizing Bulgaria’s them of one sides parallel several had Dobruja modernizing of attempts Romanian The , / Njagulov Cultural politics Cultural

- details administrative organiz administrative , Sofia, 1986, pp. 111 pp. Sofia,1986, , ssibilities of self ssibilities

,, The history of Dobruja, p. history ,, ofDobruja, The

td f omns cmn) Te P The (comuna). communes of sted see

П .

in Greater Romania Greater in о о д о Т ly achieved results of that plan that required enormous efforts from efforts enormous required that plan that of results achieved ly

- 165 - governing tothe subjects. in

о в, о р

ation of the state changed, dividing the country in districts in country the dividing changed, state the of ation

Изследвания по българската история Българският национален национален Българският история българската по Изследвания

291 Иен тчня бри дбужнкт национално добруджанското в борби и течения “Идейни , 1995, p.53 , 1995, 410 409

According to the Romanian constitution of 1923, of constitution Romanian the to According

The movement later sided sided later movement The , 1964 , - 57 Leften Stavros Stavria Stavros Leften

ispute generallybrought Bulgariaispute the to

na oe, a ltl cac of chance little had ones, anian 411 b

easant party insisted on further further on insisted party easant С rujan Revolutionary organization inorganization Revolutionaryrujan

., 1986, 1986, .,

pp. pp. 111 nos with the Communist the with –

, 165

“ Balkan Balkan Investigation in the in Investigation /

P, Todorov P, federation: a a federation: 408 bout the bout

Part of Part

being , “The , 100 -

CEU eTD Collection guaranteeing future region. for prosperous the the factor, stabilizing a of position the occupy primarily could it Cadrilater, regain could Bulgaria in factor: balancing the out point would Penakov region. the modernizing of ideas propose them of some however, back, province the of part Southern the least at get to side Bulgarian the rights. national their of oppression Romanian the against fight own their conduct to began Dobruja Southern the society. Bulgarian the in adapted be to had that migrants of wave 415 11 414 p. 341 2007, 413 1939 412 and administering of projects common the share not did and another one with connected T Balkans. the of the in Republic included Federative being Dobruja independent the of idea the with supported united DRO be to while region Bulgaria, the for fighting was IDRO The center. one from controlled being fully not did government regainingwasBulgaria influencing thelandsinarather back negative way. o idea mere the however, question; Macedonian the of importance the by diminished being not was Dobruja of value the that noted be should It dispute. Macedonian the of importance the with compete fully not could Bulgaria, for important issue. Macedonian vital more much a to them relating primarily, th f more but ertre affected territories e

- As an example see Asexample an For further details see Milachkov in Milachkov see details further For Penacoff Penacoff 12 Даскалов , 2 vol., Sofia,2005 ,vol., 2

aig eea rvltoay raiain o te ertr o Dbua Bulgarian Dobruja, of territory the on organizations revolutionary several Having debate, the of participants Bulgarian the of texts the from much so not clear becomes It - Le problem de la Dobroudja de Sud. Un aspect economique et social dec e problem e dec social et economique aspect Un Sud. de Dobroudja la de problem Le rom the analysis of analysis the rom , 417 Българското

413

Georgi General ,

p p. p. 27

the local public sphere public local the общество

Bazhdarov, ly, Bulgarian texts from the period of 1913 of period the from texts Bulgarian ly, manage - 36

the 1878 , Нягулов

a uestion mac donienne dans le pass et le et pass le dans donienne mac uestion a Bulgaria’s attempts to modernize the country that the loss of loss the that country the modernize to attempts Bulgaria’s all of them, as the as them, of all - 1939

История he organizations were in many cases not directly directly not cases many in were organizations he ,

том

so so 2, 2, 414

на София that cntn trioy oss n iaiiis of inabilities and losses territory constant f

Добруджа y were following different scopes without without scopes different following were y it , 2005/Daskalov, 2005/Daskalov, , began producing propagandistic texts, texts, propagandistic producing began /

Njagulov 415 412

Dobruja The Bulgarians remaining inremaining Bulgarians The

- The history of Dobruja of history The 1940 reflect the ideas of ideas the reflect 1940 T e ugra scey 1878 society, Bulgarian he present

, although extremely although , ,

2. ed.Sofia,1926. 2. , Paris, 1928, p 1928, Paris, , , Sofia, Sofia, ,

case case 101 p

- .

CEU eTD Collection h qeto o hw o o i do to how of question the Bulgaria in Generally, area. unsolved, remained problems major The ineffective. be to out turned progress of way the on agriculture country’s the pushing Dobruja, fortrying with the backward tocope program defined concretely one had Bulgaria Neither region. the modernizing 417 416 Craiova Treaty. the of signing and 1940 preceding changes dramatic the by more but sides, both of activities propagandi bythe much so not weredefined 1940 in Dobruja of division the of results final the Generally, states. the of modernization actual the with aspirations land of projects two of GreaterR clash The lands. the preserving on oriented more was policy Romania’s with stagnation by 1938. achie to later The unfinished. reforms Wishing regime. authoritarian an to leading slowly were itself modernize the to Bulgaria of attempts of part bigger the leaving overthrown, was government own its of st were limits projects His services. the labor compulsory including in possibilities, modernization promoted success, great with always not although “mo

Ibidem Bell Bulgaria attempted to achieve its foreign policy goals of gaining the territories, while while territories, the gaining of goals policy foreign its achieve to attempted Bulgaria dernization did not occur by itself; rather it had to be nurtured by the state”. the by nurtured be to had it rather itself; by occur not did dernization , in Augustinos, in , Augustinos, Just like in Romania, in Bulgaria the attempts to finally solve the agricultural problem, agricultural the solve finally to attempts the Bulgaria in Romania, in like Just e centralization, ve

omania and Greater Bulgaria forced both countries to attempt the consolidation of their their of consolidation the attempt to countries both forced Bulgaria Greater and omania

Diverse paths to modernity, modernity, to paths Diverse

417

ugra ea wt e with began Bulgaria

not the question of whether or not to industrialize the country, but country, the industrialize to not or whether of question the not

, a t b akd n answered. and asked be to had t, although Stambolijski tried to cope with the backwardness of the the of backwardness the with cope to tried Stambolijski although ness of the territories oftheness country. oftheterritories Westport, 1991, p. p. 22 1991, Westport, prmns ih oenzto ad ne up ended and modernization with xperiments

tmoisis da a that was idea Stambolijski’s

opped in 1923 when the when 1923 in opped stic strategies or applied or strategies stic 416

Stambolijski, 102

CEU eTD Collection the propagandistic side of claiming rights over the territory becomes generally clear, the the clear, generally becomes territory the over rights claiming of side propagandistic the While back. territory lost the get could that projects administrative several creating Bulgarians problem the to attention foreign the attract to trying was Bulgaria land, acquired newly the on regime nationalistic oppressive an established Romania While state. the in Dobruja Romania Neither 420 419 Forschunge 418 diplomatic propaganda,b the of influence the by not explained be can success Romanian and “unsuccess” to order in machine propaganda to manage inthe wider world activities community”. outside thevillage capacity empathy, flexibility, and adaptiveness of terms in backward still “were peasants the in Bulgaria and Romania 20 the both of beginning for typical problems, agrarian mentioned already the artisans, local the ruined goods Western the of afflux The particular. in and general in railway T victorious. partially networks” telephone and telegraph roads, and railways of infrastructure the of up “building the Although modernization. wa states Balkan the of neither but states, remainseconomic a vaguearea. side of the question

Daskalov, Ibidem Daskalov, Both Romania and Bulga and Romania Both not trying were Romania and Bulgaria Both

n, 57, 1998, n, 57,

3. to

Op. cit Op.

Dvlpet n h Bla Prpey ro t Wrd a I: oe Reflections Some II: War World to Prior Periphery Balkan the in “Development

make it a part of the nation, connected with the body of the nation the of body the with connected nation, the of part a it make Shaping ut generally by the persistence of both parties and their involvement in the politicalthe involvementin their and parties both of persistencegenerallyby the ut , p. 213 p. , nr ugra rsne a ucsfl atr o quickly of pattern successful a presented Bulgaria nor ,

th p. 212 p.

cen e bec o considera of absence he

justification of the overclaims Dobruja. 418 modernity: the resultsof RomanianBulgarian and

tury, were being solved only partially. Romanian as well as Bulgarian as well as Romanian partially. only solved being were tury,

enabled Bulgaria to achieve success, the results could be named be could results the success, achieve to Bulgaria enabled

ria ado ria fly needn fo Great from independent fully s

civ is ainl nert. H integrity. national its achieve pt ed

educational reforms, both attempt both reforms, educational l traffic ble

only to only

419

physically integrate Dobruja into the into Dobruja integrate physically

iiihd h sgiiac o the of significance the diminished

420 powers

wvr Blai’ first Bulgaria’s owever,

integrating in the question of of question the in ed -

state. However, However, state. to use the state the use to s of the local local the of s ”

Southern Southern in in Südos

only 103 t -

CEU eTD Collection beyond territorial division. simple the reasons the uncovered that dispute a in resulted projects state two those of clash The Bulgaria. was region the with connected goals economical and political significant most the of One parties. both for important extremely it view From originated. had nation Romanian or Bulgarian where place a as than territory strategic a as more regarded be can view, of point this from itself, Dobruja alliances. 1944,1989. Добруджа 421 the Romania Greater of project the to end an Putting untouched. remained border the 1947, the Bulgaria, to place, took exchange Dobruja population Southern of restitution the After towns. neighboring and Balchik and Romanization active of policy resettlement from ofthe different ofthepopulation country. parts the with suppressed be could resistance this however, po The identity. national strong and defined cases many in have not did who locals the assimilate sides investment Dobruja economically could intoan turn profitableregion Romaniaand Bulgaria. for both proper the with However, before. times several mentioned were that agriculture for significant be to seem not do region the of fertility agricultural and resources natural the 1913, By part. Northern the taking of case in Russia with side even could that Bulgaria for line border longer a establishing of significance

licy of unification of the region applied by Romanians met resistance from the Bulgarian part, part, Bulgarian the from resistance met Romanians by applied region the of unification of licy See ,

Dobruja together with its Southern and Northern part possessed several features that made made that features several possessed part Northern and Southern its with together Dobruja s ngtv tat but trait, negative a as ааоо, “ Панайотов, Bulg landscape ethnical The access an as Romania by viewed Dobruja, , N 6, 1989/ Panajotov, “The exchange of the minority population between Bulgaria Bulgaria between population minority the of exchange “The Panajotov, 1989/ 6, N ,

aria regained Southern Dobruja in 1940 despite the Romanian attempts to preserve preserve to attempts Romanian the despite 1940 in Dobruja Southern regained aria амн н млисвн нслне ед Блаи и уъи 1940 Румъния и България между население малцинствено на Размяна

of the region , being extremely uneven, could be seen by both both by seen be could uneven, extremely being , region the of could 421

balancing the ethnic picture of two Dobrujas. Reaffi Dobrujas. two of picture ethnic the balancing

the ide the still still several of the reasons connected with the undeveloped the with connected reasons the of several fe svrl oiie set lk psiiiis to possibilities like aspects positive several offer a of making it part of G of part it making of a

point

to t to he sea and the Dan the and sea he

reater Romania or Greater Greater or Romania reater

the economic point of point economic the and Romania 1940 Romania and ube delta ube - 1944” 1944” rmed in rmed

, had a a had ,

104 Сб. Сб. -

CEU eTD Collection involvingwar. already inthe the from lands not troublesome the of region one but important, the less suddenly making significantly Dobruja in situation the reshaped war the of beginning

point of view of both states both of view of point 105

CEU eTD Collection international context that positions the region the positions that context international 1913 set in and countries arranges the introduces, between dispute territorial the in supporting cause individuals Romanian eminent several of works the in applied and reflected as propaganda, of concept the by defined and framed is thesis current the of focus The territory. the over right Romania’s or Bulgaria’s prove to helping arguments multiple of set a connected generate closely very historicallynationho their and themselves two between differences create to how sought nations neighboring describing case remarkable a as regarded i to attempts Bulgarian and Romanian previous of replica a or Dobrujan continuation a merely the not as seen debates, is question the of participants the of eyes the Through methods. propagandistic patt typical, very general either as the viewed representing be can texts whose individuals, several to limited be to had research current the of focus the dispute, Dobrujan the in involved people of number large rather (writers, storytellers or witnesses attentive as dispute the in involvement direct or ethnographers), (historians, authority intellectual politicians), or diplomats o texts the Great them of recognition the for competing elites two and projects modernization the through shown is Romania” “Greater and Bulgaria” “Greater of idea the between clash The sea. Black the and non Danube the between and multiethnic a of peculiarity its however, highlighting, debates, f the participants of the debate chosen on the basis of their political influence (eminent (eminent influence political their of basis the on chosen debate the of participants the f The propagandistic strategies of both Romania and Bulgaria are analyzed through the the through analyzed are Bulgaria and Romania both of strategies propagandistic The

Powers. Powers. ntegrate and assimilate provinces establishing a firm borderline of the state. It is is It state. the of borderline firm a establishing provinces assimilate and ntegrate

Conclusions. Dobruja reshaped Dobruja Conclusions. te icsin bu te putnne f orj it an into Dobruja of appurtenance the about discussion the s ern, or extremely unusual, but still appealing to the same same the to appealing still but unusual, extremely or ern,

optto o to nation two of competition next to next

the numerous similar cases of borderland borderland of cases similar numerous jurists,

etc). Taking into account a a account into Taking etc). .

- building programs, two two programs, building

h Blain r the or Bulgarian the -

ooeeu area homogeneous and their states by states their and - 90 Te t The 1940. od and and od 106 ext

CEU eTD Collection the real ethniclandscape. the shown, is it As it. corrupting does thesis current a of people of number actual leave to nation one’s of enforcement or exchange population Instead, easily. counted be not could and stable that demonstrates thesis The the access theBlack to sea. of controllingland with possibilities and establishing theDanube profiting from navigation, ports precious a province the making was that position important strategically its by mainly defined wa significance Dobruja’s it. into discourses historical nationalistic their of ideas the inserted 1913 in Romania and Bulgaria explanation The it. dividing allow con the of works The War. World Second the after re and Romania Greater to end the brought that influence external on but produced, had debate the of participants the texts the of strength propagandistic treaty of signingof the with 1940 Dobrujanin the problemof solution the and dispute the of outcomes H territory. t shows research current its right

claims legitimate claims s s ”

, the superiority of one’s nation, the religious or linguistic factor linguistic or religious the nation, one’s of superiority the , to perceive the roles of Great of roles the perceive to The the on mostly depended land the gaining of success The Craiova. Craiova. owever, their actions can hardly be described as successful, relating them to the the to them relating successful, as described be hardly can actions their owever, result

of the division of the region depended mostly not on the value and and value the on not mostly depended region the of division the of

o rgr te ata dt” s re as data” “actual the regard not as well as on the elaborate tactics in political strategy and economics. economics. and strategy political in tactics elaborate the on as well as

a bt pris ee esset n utfig t justifying in persistent were parties both hat

s of how and why Dobruja became extremely important for both both for important extremely became Dobruja why and how of s ny nationality played nationality ny

- h pretg o t of percentage the 1940 lies partially in the methods of propaganda of the sides, that that sides, the of propaganda of methods the in partially lies 1940 population censuses in the majority of the cases did not reflect reflect not did cases the of majority the in censuses population

Powers deciding the fate of the province, dividing and re and dividing province, the of fate the deciding Powers

it co it temporaries give an insight on insight an give temporaries e oainBlain inhabitants Romanian/Bulgarian he

in the process of dividing the territory. the dividing of process the in uld be effortlessly shap effortlessly be uld ibe o te esn o easy of reasons the for liable shaped the political map once again again once map political the shaped . This fact diminished the role the diminished fact This . as rfrig o “historical to (referring ways ) one side used to prove prove to used side one heir rights over the the over rights heir ed

in one’s favor by by favor one’s in

the dispute that dispute the

ways of of ways a not was The The The 107 the the the s -

CEU eTD Collection economical and political life of both countries. While Romania was seeking to preserve all of its of all preserve to seeking was Romania While countries. both of life political and economical social, the for vital as region the depicted propaganda whose countries, both for task greatest the or Romania into Dobruja of integration The it. imagined had texts the of authors the as vital as being from far was parties competing two for region the of importance dispute W World First the and wars in rule Romanian the under came territory, Bulgarian a previously Cadrilater, 20 the of beginning the By undermine to attempts Bulgarian and assimilation of experiments Romanian for playground discoursesupon thegeneral inBulgaria and nationalistic Romania. touch and region particular one bordersof the surpass that projects modernization competing and Dobruja state and nation in involved were that centers cultural essential more much other and Plovdiv Sofia, Bucharest, from there exported ve in feelings patriotic Bulgarian and Romanian great. that being from far was importance its that obvious becomes it nations, attem sides both Although region. its with majority active politically and dominant influential, two countries. acti d external and internal the However, neighbors. other its with relations and problem Macedonian vital the on concentrated was Bulgaria one, amon territories, acquired newly ve propagandistic strategies in the contested region often independent of its actual value for for value actual its of independent often region contested the in strategies propagandistic ve en a Seen eve that explains research The to re to n question is seen in the context of Romanian and Bulgarian nation Bulgarian and Romanian of context the in seen is question n - emerge once emerge

s a part of these discourses, the Dobrujan dispute becomes in some measure a a measure some in becomes dispute Dobrujan the discourses, these of part a s

again since the Berlin Treaty. Berlin the since again ar reshaped the borders of the whole region, causing the Dobrujan Dobrujan the causing region, whole the of borders the reshaped ar th

etr, oten orj ws nertd in integrated was Dobruja Northern century, g which Dobruja could hardly be seen as the most significant most the as seen be hardly could Dobruja which g y ae ae oiiae i Dbua n mr otn were often more and Dobruja in originated cases rare ry td o rv hsoia significance historical prove to pted - building debates on their level. Hence, in the research the in Hence, level. their on debates building i 11 nihr oain, nor Romanians, neither 1913 in n ifficulties both states fa states both ifficulties

However, the research clarifies that the the that clarifies research the However, im ainlsi psto i the in position nationalistic firm

ced had also marked their their marked also had ced

Bulgaria did not present not did Bulgaria

of the region for their their for region the of

Bulgarians were the the were Bulgarians - to

building programs programs building 1913. The Balkan The 1913.

oai, while Romania, ,

108 the the

CEU eTD Collection crucialgreat places thathad a played innationbuilding ofboth role Romaniansand Bulgarians territor other to (compared of region a turned debate the in participants active other and diplomats writers, ident Romanian and journalists, historians, skillful how of example interesting very a Bulgarianpresents dispute Dobrujan The defining of topic wide state local of terms the in legitimized be to had land the over rights the thesis, the in demonstrated is it As history. region’s the of reinterpretations various crea the than complicated more be to out turns claims territorial proving of task The them. region non with that borders establishing region, the in situation the changed radically followed, that war the and Romania Greater of dissolution popula The 1878. in Berlin of congress the after country the to granted part, So int the u thern part of the province, was returned to Bulgaria, while Romania preserved the Northern the preserved Romania while Bulgaria, to returned was province, the of part thern ervention of Great of ervention Reappearing in 1913, the problem of the appurtenance of Dobruja was to be solved be to was Dobruja of appurtenance the of problem the 1913, in Reappearing - numerous minorities, a minorities, reshapednumerous

Powers and the beginning of the Second World War. Cadrilater, the Cadrilater, War. World Second the of beginning the and Powers ies with Romanian and Bulgarian population) into one of the most most the of one into population) Bulgarian and Romanian with ies

r still are

hold ing Dobruja.

an almost purely Romanian and Bulgarian Bulgarian and Romanian purely almost an

- building discourse, which opens a a opens which discourse, building ities in the interwar period. period. interwar the in ities tion exchange, the exchange, tion little importance little tion of of tion with 109 .

CEU eTD Collection Antonov, Stoian. Antonov, Stoian. O. R. Benedict Anderson, Howard. Derek Aldcroft, Ranki. Gyorgy and Ivan, T. Berend, Bend Beaman, ArdernG.. Georgi. Bazhdarov, Alberto. Basciani, Carmichael.Cathie and Stephen,Barbour, In Hungary." in nationalism liberal of horizons intellectual "The Monika. Baar, C.. Robert Austin, Gerasimos. Augustinos, ix, Reinhard. ix, Books, conteste and Toronto: Press, University 2012. Toronto of development n Aldershot, Ashgate 2006. Hants, Co., Pub. England: Cambridge:University 1982. ;, Press Cambridge York: Wiley, 1964. "Houdojnik", 1926. Sud, 1918 University 2000. Press, ationalism

2001. 22. Tatarite v Bulgariia - 1940 Un conflitto balcanico: la contesa fr contesa la balcanico: conflitto Un Nation Founding a Balkan state: Albania's experiment with democracy, 1920 democracy, with experiment Albania's state: Balkan a Founding . Rev. and extended 1991. London: ed. Verso, M. Stambuloff a usin aeoine as e as e l present le et passe le dans macedonienne question La Greenwood P . New York: iette: oain n Hnain ae studies case Hungarian and Romanian identities: d . Cosenza:Periferia, 2001. Diverse paths to modernity in southeastern Europe: essays in national in essays Europe: southeastern in modernity to paths Diverse

- Europe's third world: the European periphery in the interwar years interwar the in periphery European the world: third Europe's building and citizenship: studies of our changing social order. social changing our of studies citizenship: and building

mgnd omnte: elcin o te rgn n sra of spread and origin the on reflections communities: Imagined

. New York: Press, Arno 1971. . 1. Izd.. 1. Dobrich: 2004. ed. Navrez, The European periphery and industrialization, 1780 industrialization, and periphery European The Bibliography Language and nationalism in Europe in nationalism and Language ress, 1991.

a Bulgaria e Romania in Dobrugia del Dobrugia in Romania e Bulgaria a

2 e. oi: Imp. Sofia: ed. 2. . Bdps: Regio Budapest: . . Oxford: Oxford Oxford: . Nation - building building - - . New New . 1925 1914 110 . . .

CEU eTD Collection Brock, Peter. Peter. Brock, 1850 Bulgaria, In Thought Political Western Of Influence "The E.. C. Black, Birtek, Maria. Deckard, Stef Dechev, Gr.. Grigore Danescu, ______Rumen. Daskalov, Gelu. Culicea, D.. Apostol Culea, Nicolae. Comnen, Stiliian. Chilingirov, Ca linescu, George.

Faruk. Bucuresti: Casa scoalelor, 1928. politique. Izd.Sofiia: na"Dobrudzha", Narodospomogatelniia fondu 1917. Europe American Review Historical 2004. Sofiia: InstitutSofiia: izsledvane za 2010. na izkustvata, ethnographique Budapest: European University Central Press, 2011. revival Constanta: Biblioteca Judeteana Constanta,1998. an.

The Slovak The Citizenship andtheNation Citizenship . Budapest:European Central 2004. University Press, . Toronto: University Toronto Press, of 1976. orga n urrl li ioa Ira bbigai antt s comentata si adnotata bibliografie Iorga: Nicolae lui lucrarile in Dobrogea Eugenics and modernization in interwar Romania interwar in modernization and Eugenics nat na mrezhi bulgarskoto: na tursene V . Lausanne:. 1918. Payot, . . La Dobrogea (Dobroudja); essai historique, economique, ethnographique, et et ethnographique, economique, historique, essai (Dobroudja); Dobrogea La Istoria literaturi romane literaturi Istoria Bulgarskoto obstestvo 1878 Th eaig h ps mdr Bul modern past the Debating a teu s trebue Cat ordh i aeo urzdn; K vuzrazhdane; naheto i Dobrudzha mkn o a ain n h Blas itrorpy f h Bulgarian the of historiography Balkans the in nation a of making e . Bucarest: Imprimerie. Bucarest: l'Independance Roumaine, de 1903.

national awakening: an essay in the intellectual history of east central east of history intellectual the in essay an awakening: national Dobrogea (La Dobroudja): etude de geographie physique et et physique geographie de etude Dobroudja): (La Dobrogea si oiie epe orga Teuu, rznu, viitorul prezentul, Trecutul, Dobrogea: despre oricine stie a

48, no.3(1943): 507.

- state inGreece andTurkey

. Bucuresti: 1983. Compendiu, - 1939 ain itr: rm tmoo t Zhivkov to Stambolov from history: garian . Vol. II,. Vol. Sofia; Gutenberg, 2005.

пoan itmot XIX intimnost sпionalna

ulturno

. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University Pa.: Pittsburgh, . - . London: TaylorFrancis, &. soihsi izdiravaniiaп. istoricheski

- 1885." 1885." - X vek) XXI The The 111 . . . . .

CEU eTD Collection Dobre, Augusta. Dimou, Stefan. Detchev, Hitchin A.. Paul Hiemstra, Forster. N. Michael and Gottfried, Johann Herder, Misha. Glenny, Gellner, Ernest. Alex. Francis, Ielis.Erolova, l agricultural as Greeks the of think not "Do Hakan. Erdem, Balkans." The And Bulgaria In Tatars and "Turks Ali. Eminov, Gabriella. Elgenius, Ekrem, Mehmet Ali. N.. Eisenstadt, S. s, Keith. lrc, n Vslc Manea. Vasilica and Florica, Nation (2000): 129 Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave 2011. Macmillan, documente in the Balkans LAPLambertSaarbrucken: Academic 2010. Pub., of Pittsburgh Press, 2002. New York: Garland, 1987. CambridgeUniversity Press, 2002. V identity iking, 2000. Dobrudzha: granisti i identichnosti i granisti Dobrudzha: The making of modern Romanian culture litera culture Romanian modern of making The - . London:. Academic Tauris 2006. Studies, state inGreece Turkey and Nations andnationalism Nations The Romanians, 1774 The Balkans: nationalism, war, and the Great Powers, 1804 Powers, Great the and war, nationalism, Balkans: The Who are our ancestors?: "Race", s "Race", ancestors?: our are Who Tradition, change, andmodernity Entangled paths towards modernity contextualizing socialism and nationalism and socialism contextualizing modernity towards paths Entangled . Bucu. - lxnr D Xnpl n te eeomn o Rmna historiography Romanian of development the and Xenopol D. Alexandru 164. Symbols of nations and nationalism and nations of Symbols Din istoria turcilor dobrogeni turcilor istoria Din

. Budapest: Central European University Press, 2009.

resМ¦ti: Editura Europa 2000. nova,

- 1866 nl 90 amt rmn d l utmtm a dictat: la ultimatum la de romana armata 1940: Anul . Ithaca:. CornellUniversity 1983. Press, . London: &Francis,. Taylor 78 2004.

. Oxford, Eng.:. Oxford, 1996. Press, Clarendon . 1. izd. ed. Sofiia:Paradigma,. 1.izd. 2010. . BucuresМ¦ti:Kriterion, Editura 1994. . New Wiley, York: 1973. cience, and politics in Bulgaria 1879 Bulgaria in politics and cience, hlspia writings Philosophical : celebrating nationhood celebrating :

cy and the development of national national of developmentthe and cy brr. In aborers." Nationalities Papers Nationalities

iiesi ad the and Citizenship

. Cambridge, UK: UK: Cambridge, . - 1999 -

83.

. Houndmills, . . New York: New .

28, no. 1 1 no. 28,

- 1912 112 . .

CEU eTD Collection Ibraileanu, Garabet, and Ioan Holban. Holban. Ioan and Garabet, Ibraileanu, Nuredin. Ibram, J.. E. Hobsbawm, C.. Andrew Janos, Robert.Jackall, ______Todorov. Anastas Ischirkoff, Nicolae. Iorga, ______Iordachi,Constanti Izvori za istorijata naD Izvori istorijata za 2002. Pittsburgh, of University Studies, International for Center University Studies, European 1878 Romania, into Dobrogea studies In Romania." Bucuresti: Minerva, 1984. invatamant si religioasa maternain limba [England: Cambridge University Press, 1990. from pre carte horstext, Weltchronik, 1918. Centrale des1918. Nationalites, historiques

. Budapest:Books 2001. ;, Regio ris ainu e pltqe de politiques et nationaux Droits Propaganda -

ouiae mslaa i Dobroge din musulmana Comunitatea to postcommunism n. "The California of the Romanians: The integration of northern Dobrogea in in Dobrogeanorthern of integrationThe Romanians: the of California"The n. ain ad ainls sne 70 porme mt, reality myth, programme, 1780: since nationalism and Nations . Impr.deJassy: l'Etat, 1917. .. . at eta Erp i te oen ol: h pltc o te borderlands the of politics the world: modern the in Europe Central East . La Bulgarie et la Dobrou la et Bulgarie La La Macedoine et a constitution de l'Exarchat bulgare (l830 bulgare l'Exarchat de constitution a et Macedoine La Nation . Lausanne:Librarie. centrale 1918. des nationalite, iiesi, nation Citizenship, obrudza

. New University York: York Press, New 1995. - La Dobroudja et les revendications roumaines revendicationsles et Dobroudja La building and contested identities: Romanian and Hungarian case Hungarian and Romanian identities: contested and building . Sofija: Izd.. Sofija: Balgarskata na Naukite, Akademijana 1992.

. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2000. prtl rtc n utr rmnac; oe i impresii si Note romaneasca; cultura in critic Spiritul

- 1913 -

n state and . Pittsburgh, Pa.: Center for Russian & East East & Russian for Center Pa.: Pittsburgh, . dja: Notices politiques et geographiques et politiques Notices dja:

- .

. Constanta [Romania: Ex Ponto, ExPonto, . Constanta[Romania: 1998. Ruas as a orga considerations dobrogea: la dans Roumans s

- bui : eee e it siiul: viata spirituala: viata de repere a: dn: h itgain f Northern of integration the lding:

. Lausanne: LibrairieLausanne: . - l897) avec une une avec l897) Cambridge .

. Berne: Berne: .

113 .

CEU eTD Collection aaaio, nsai N.. Anastasia Karakasidou, Donnel Victoria and Garth, Jowett, D.. Brian Joseph, Olegovich. Dmitri Labauri, Antonina. Kuzmanova, Schmidt. Ch. Alexandre and Nikolaevich, Aleksandr Krupenskii, Statham. Paul and Ruud, Koopmans, Hans. Kohn, In inethnicity.” “Variable Abner. Kochen, Keyes,F. Charles Frederick. Kellogg, H.. Kemal Karpat, La Dobroudjameridionale (leLa Quadrilatere) era of global history. era global of University Press, Washington 1981.306. of University 1995. Press, UniversityMadison, Wis.: Press,of Wisconsin 1985. Macedonia, 1870 1986. competition, andlanguagecoexistence izkustvo, 1989. izkustvo, otnoshenii mezhdunarodnite question." contention and political VanPrinceton, Nostrand, N.J.: 1967.

rld t nation to Prelude

Ethnic change Ethnic . S.l.: s.n.,1919. toa populati Ottoman hn agae clie prpcie o lnug cnlc, language conflict, language on perspectives collide: languages When h ra t Rmna independence Romanian to road The

- 1990 t eil d Caoa vpou z Jzn Dbuza v Dobrudzha Juzhna za vuprosut Craiova: do Neuilly Ot ogrke nat Bolgarskoe ils f ha, il o bod psae t ntoho i Greek in nationhood to passages blood: of hills wheat, of Fields . [1st ed.New York: . Chicago: Chicago. UniversityPress, of 1997.

. New Yo . Seattle: -

tts te rnh n Gra eprec, 1789 experience, German and French the states; l. , 1919 a, Propaganda and persuasion and Propaganda The making of a European public sphere media discourse discourse media sphere public European a of making The n 1830 on,

rk: Cambridge Universityrk: Cambridge Press, 2010. University of Washington Press, 1981. University ofWashingtonPress, пoane vzei v aeoi i rki 1894 v Frakii i Makedonii v dvizhenie sпionalnoe . Paris: [Imp. 1919. Bauer], . Paris: et Dubois

- 1940 . Columbus: Ohio State University Ohio Press, 2003. . Columbus: - tnc change Ethnic 94 dmgahc n sca characteristics social and demographic 1914: Harper, 1962. Harper, 1 id e. oia Drh izd Durzh. Sofiia: ed. izd. 1. . Kohn, Hans. Kohn,

. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue Purdue Ind.: Lafayette, West . E. hre Kye, Seattle: Keyyes, Charles Ed. .

The age of nationalism; thefirst The age ofnationalism; . Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, Calif.: Park, Newbury . ht s h "Bessarabian the is What

- o ak i nauka vo - 1815. 114

- . .

CEU eTD Collection ieen, Irina. Livezeanu, Lasswell, R.. Lampe, John E.. Paul Michelson, Memoir council tothe the representatives national ofDobroudja from Central thestates of A.. M. Mavrodiev, Terry.Martin, ______Markov, MilanG.. Tchavdar. Marinov, Dinu. Valeriu and Mihail, Manoilescu, MacDermott, Mercia F., Robert Lyons, office, 1919. called together torestorethenations thepeace among nationalisme danslesnationalisme Balkans BucuresМ¦ti: 1991. Editura EnciclopedicaМ†, AgricultureNaturalResources,California andat Berkeley University:,1994. of reform 1918 struggle, 13. Drinov, 2008. borby politicheskoi praktika programma, ideologiia, gg.: 1908 kn 1939 Roy Harold. "Propaganda." In "Propaganda." Harold. -

vo, 1917. al Prtg.Off., Court 1919. . Ithaca:. 2001. CornellUniversity Press, The affirmative action empire: nations and nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923 Union, theSoviet in nationalism and empire:nations action affirmative The . Berkeley, Calif.: Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Division of of Division Economics, Resource and Agricultural of Dept. Calif.: Berkeley, . The Bulgarian economy century inthe twentieth Cultural politics in Greater Romania: regionalism, nation building & ethnic ethnic & building nation regionalism, Romania: Greater in politics Cultural

.. Bulgaria's historical rights to historical to rights Dobrudja Bulgaria's

n Gro C Rausser. C. Gordon and

Dobrodzha; kriticheski etiud, kriticheski Dobrodzha; Conflict and crisis: Romanian political development,1861 Romanian political crisis: and Conflict h pltcl ae f oruj atr h Bri Cnrs .. Congress Berlin the after Dobroudja of fate political The

A history of Bulgaria, 1393 ofBulgaria, history A - a usin aeoine e 94 ns j nos a 1944 de macedonienne question La 1930 . Ithaca:. 1995. CornellUniversity Press, Propaganda

. Paris: L'Harmattan,. Paris: 2010. ittl e a in: eoi, iulie memorii, Viena: la de Dictatul irpin n cniut i Blai' agrarian Bulgaria's in continuity and Disruption . New York: New York University Press, 1995. 1995. Press, University York New York: New . . 2. dopul. izd. ed. Sofiia: Pechatnista Sofiia: ed. izd. dopul. 2. . - 1885

. London:. Unwin,& 1962. Allen . Bern: 1918. Haupt, P. . Sofia: Royal court printing . New York: St. Martin's, St. York: . New 1986.

. 1. izd. ed. Sofiia: Marin Marin Sofiia: ed. izd. 1. . ours: communisme et et communisme ours: - 1871

- . 2. ed. Sofia: ed. 2. . uut 1940 august . New York: York: New .

na Voen. Voen. na

115 -

CEU eTD Collection Mitrany, David. David. Mitrany, Plamen. Mitev, Diana. Mishkova, Pariado, D.. C. R.. M. Palairet, Robin. Okey, T.. H. Norris, Njagulov,Blagovest. Victor. Neumann, Mut Smith. William Murray, Murgesc Ilin.Murarasu, and Stancu D., Sorin. Mitu, fhe, Petur. afchiev, 1910. nationaleidentitatii romanesti, 1831 Romanian nationalism London: University Press;, 193 H.Milford, Oxford 1699 of Adrianople, Budapest: European University Central Press, 2009. Garland 1987. Pub., Cambridge,UniversityUK.: Press, Cambridge 1997. 2003. University S.C: Columbia, 1993. Carolinaof South Press, identitiesrecognition multiple of "Khudozhnik", 1927. u, Mirela. Mirela. u, Re

Eastern Europe, 1740 Europe, Eastern Islam in the Balkans: religion and society between Europe and the Arab world Arab the and Europe between society and religion Balkans: the in Islam Dobrogea si dobrogenii si Dobrogea - Empire searching the nation: the Romanian file: studies and selected bibliography on bibliography selected and studies file: Romanian the nation: the searching The land & the peasant in Rumania; the war and agrarian reform (1917 reform agrarian and war the Rumania; in peasant the & land The h Bla eoois . 1800 c. economies Balkan The Intre "bunul crestin" si "bravul roman": rolul scolii primare in construirea construirea in primare scolii rolul roman": "bravul si crestin" "bunul Intre ocpuly ytfe: East mystified: Conceptually e te epe oiis f ainl euirt i Suhatr Europe Southeastern in peculiarity national of politics people the We, ugr i uui v soiaa a uasie zemi dunavskite na istoriiata v rumuni: i Bulgari Istoria‚ naDobrudza Istoria‚ s and peninsulas: Southeastern Europe between Karlowitz and the Peace the and Karlowitz between Europe Southeastern peninsulas: and s h mkn o te akn states, Balkan the of making The - 1829

Natsionalismul lui lui EminescuNatsionalismul . InternationalCluj: Access,Book 2008. . Berlin:Lit ;,2010. - 1985 feudalism to communism to feudalism 1985 . Constanta: "Ovidiu", Tip. 1905. . Bucharest: Encyclopedica , Vol. III,, Vol. Sofia: - 1878 - eta Erp tr bten tncs and ethnicism between torn Europe Central . Iasi:. '92, Editura A 1999.

- 94 eouin ihu development without evolution 1914: 0. . Bucuresti: Editura ATOS,. 1999. -

, 2007. Nw ok Clmi University, Columbia York: New .

. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, London: ed. 2nd . Publishing House, 2004. Publishing House,

. Sofiia: Pechatnitsa Pechatnitsa Sofiia: .

21)

116 . . . .

CEU eTD Collection ondlv Todor. Popnedelev, Petr IgnatI..Penkov, St.. Ivan Penakov, Kinga Sata, Janette. Sampimon, Peter. Sahlins, Andrea.Rosler, ______Victor. Roudometof, Ra Simeon. Radev, uec, din ad o Bit Ion and Adrian, dulescu, v Ptr Khristov. Petar ov, European Monographs ;, 2000. European ;, Monographs Bucuresti: Editura Stiintifica siEnciclopedica, 1979. ed.izd.] Sofiia:Bulg. 1973. pisatel, Okhridski" :,1997. Kooper uchenidrugi probleme Southeastern Europe 1838 liberalism, Romanian century context: history international inits anintellectual University CaliforniaPress, 1989. of im Banatunddie Folgeprobleme the Macedonian question -

oet Tepol noprtd osrcino h aini Transilvanyian in nation the of Construction incorporated. people "The . Koretta tia "If atsiia . Rumanien nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg: die Grenzziehung in der Dobrudscha und Dobrudscha der in GrenzziehungWeltkrieg: die Ersten dem nach Rumanien onais te aig f rne n San n h Pyrenees the in Spain and France of making the Boundaries: Anastas Ishirkov Anastas totlt n sveen Blaia [Dokum. Bulgariia suvremenna na Stroitelite Coll . Sofia:T.F. [Edition Tchipeff, 1940. Le probleme de la Dobroudja du Sud; un aspect economique et social de ce ce de social et economique aspect un Sud; du Dobroudja la de probleme Le Becoming Bulgarian: the articulation of Bulgarian identity in the nineteenth the in identity Bulgarian of articulation the Bulgarian: Becoming . 1. izd. ed. Sofiia:Univ.izd . 1.izd. The Macedonian question: culture, historiography, politics historiography, culture, question: Macedonian The ective memory, national identity, and ethnic conflict Greece, Bulgaria, and Bulgaria, Greece, conflict ethnic and identity, national memory, ective rfsr ea Mtfhe, ont nepoznat i poznat Mutafchiev, Petar Profesor acn eseisi v ordh, 97 dkai a nvriesi i universitetski na dokladi 1917: Dobrudzha, v ekspeditsiia Nauchna - 94"

. Budapest: University Central European 2009.81. Press, - soihsi autt a oisia nvrie "v Kliment "Sv. universitet Sofiiskiia na fakultet Istoricheski oleanu. . Westport, Conn.: Praeger, Conn.: . Westport, 2002. . Sofija: Univ. Izd. Kliment Ochridski,. Sofija:Univ. 1987. - 1848." In 1848."

. soi rmnlr ite uae i ae Dobrogea Mare: si Dunare dintre romanilor Istoria Frankfurt am Main [u.a.: Lang, [u.a.: amFrankfurt Main 1994.

We, the people politics of national national of politics people the We, - vo "Sv. Kliment Okhridski", 199.

- hdz. hoia. 2 t. 2 V khronika]. khudozh. . Amsterdam: Pegasus, 2006.

1 id e. Sofiia: ed. izd. 1. .

. Boulder: East East Boulder: .

peculiarity in peculiarity Berkeley: .

[2. . 117

CEU eTD Collection Seisanu, Romulus. Romulus. Seisanu, ____ Ioan. Scurtu, Todorova, Nikolaeva. Maria Thornton. Tim and Bertrand, Taithe, Stelu. Serban, Gale. Stokes, Stoica, Vasile Stavros. Leften Stavrianos, Howard and Philip, Spencer, In opinion." public of "Rise Hans. Speier, Ted Smith, J.. In nationalism." ethnic and "Civic Anthony. Smith, John. Shea, ______1995. 27. Brunswi McFarland, 1997. documente Taranesc National din nationala sociala si August 1944 Thrupp, Stroud, Gloucestershire: Sutton Pub., 1999. Thrupp, Gloucestershire: Pub., Stroud, Sutton Roma 1984. modern times RutgersN.J.: Press, University 2005. Macedonia and Greece: the struggle to define a new Balkan nation Balkan new a define to struggle the Greece: and Macedonia Viata politica din Romania: de la Marea Unire din 1918 la revolutia de eliberare de revolutia la 1918 din Unire Marea la de Romania: din politica Viata . .

Nationalism in the Balkans: an annotated bibliography annotated an Balkans: the in Nationalism nia: Paideia, 2007. Propaganda: perspective a pluralistic Transborder identities: the Romanian the identities: Transborder The Roumanians andtheirlands The Roumanians 1926 Romaniei, a politica viata Din ck, N.J.: RutgersN.J.: Universityck, 2005.182. Press,

. Bucuresti: Ed.Universul, 1928. . Dobrogea: gurile dunarii si Insula Serpilor : schita monografica, studii monografica, schita : Serpilor Insula si dunarii gurile Dobrogea: . Hamden, Conn.: ArchonConn.: . Hamden, Books, 1964.

. Bucuresti: Editura siEnciclopedica, Stiintifica 1983. Balkan federation; a history of the movement toward Balkan unity in unity Balkan toward movement the of history a federation; Balkan Imagining theBalkans Wollman. Wollman.

rpgna pltcl htrc n iett, 1300 identity, and rhetoric political Propaganda: ain ad ainls: reader a nationalism: and Nations Propaganda . Bucuresti: Albatros, 1982.

. New York:Doran company, George H.1919. - . New York: OxfordUnivers

1947: studiu critic privind istoria Partidului istoria privind critic studiu 1947: - . New York:1989. . New Praeger, speaking population in Bulgari in population speaking ain ad ainls: reader a nationalism: and Nations . New York: New York University Press, Press, University York New York: New .

. New York: Garland Pub., Pub., Garland York: New .

. New Brunswick, Brunswick, New . . Jefferson, N.C.: N.C.: Jefferson, .

ity Press, 1997.

a . Bucures. - New . 2000 1

18 ti, ti, si

CEU eTD Collection ______In characterology." national and romanticism "Political Balazs. Trencsenyi, Maria Todorova, Radu. Vulpe, M.. Christian Vladescu, Mihailescu.Vintila, George. Ungureanu, in represenatation historical and discourse Public revisited: "Transilvania Marius. Turda, ______thought texts commentaries. and studies in Southeastern Europe Incentury." 19th the of discourse political InternationalCluj: Access,Book 2008.129 f Romanian the nation: NewUniversity York Press, 2004. nationala], 1938. Bucuresti: Universul, Tip. 1926. 1940) Hungarian case studies In Romania." contemporary ____ . Bucuresti: ArsDocendi, 2005. . a Dobroudja La . Budapest:Books 2001. ;, Regio . . Abingdon, Routledge, Oxon: 2012. . Nikolaeva. The politics of "national character": a study in interwar East European European East interwar in study a character": "national of politics The Discourses of collective identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770 ofcollective andSoutheastEurope inCentral Discourses identity . Romanian the in peculiarity National of Visions charachter, and "History . La Dobroudja La Nation Chestiunea Cadrilaterului: interese romanesti si revizionism bulgar (1938 bulgar revizionism si romanesti interese Cadrilaterului: Chestiunea

Bulgarii - building and contested identities: Romanian and Hungarian case case Hungarian and Romanian identities: contested and building Balkan identities: nation and memory and nation identities: Balkan Bcrs: Mntrl fca s Ipieie ttli Imprimeria statului Imprimerile si oficial [Monitorul Bucarest: . ile: studies and selected bibliography on Romanian nationalism Romanian on bibliography selected and studies ile: . Budapest:Books 20 ;, Regio . Budapest: 174. European University Central Press, 2009. . Budapest: European University Central Press, 2007. -- . Bucuresti, 1938. mmrl uu oie rmn fo roman ofiter unui memorile : Nation

building and contested identities: Romanian and and Romanian identities: contested and building

We, the p the We, -

130.

eople politics of national peculiaritynational of politics eople 01. 198. . Washington Square, N.Y.: N.Y.: Square, Washington .

t rzne i Bulgaria in prizonier st Re - erhn the searching

- 1945) 1945) 119 - . .

CEU eTD Collection Williams, Brian Glyn.Brian Williams, Weiner, Myron. Max. Weber, Alexandru. Zub, ______Zimmern, Alfred Eckhard. Zeletin, Stefan. Scelle. Georges and Malomir, Zaharieff, Xenopol, Schifirnet, A.D.,and Constantin Gogoneata. Nicolae and D., A. Xenopol, entente bulgaro 1967. Stiintifica, Leiden: Brill, 2001. Paul, Trench,1947. Co., & Trubner introd 1994. Press, 1939.190.

uction by H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. Wright C. and Gerth H.H. by uction rm a Wbr Esy i scooy Tasae, dtd n wt an with and edited Translated, sociology: in Essays Weber: Max From Din tara magarilor: insemnari magarilor: Din tara . "What is a nation?." In nation?." a is "What . Modernization; the dynamicsModernization; growth. of La sfirsit de ciclu: despre impactul revolutiei franceze revolutiei impactul despre ciclu: de sfirsit La The Crimean Tatars: the diaspora exp diaspora the Tatars: Crimean The - roumaine

odern political doctrines,odern political . Paris: Domat Modern political doctrines, political Modern Les minorites bulgares en Roumanie conditions d'une conditions Roumanie en bulgares minorites Les Natiunea romana

. Bucuresti: Nemira, 1998. cir scae i filozofice si sociale Scrieri - Montchrestien, 1940. . London:. University Oxford Press, 1939. . New Books, York: Basic 1966. . (1st published.). ed. London: Kegan London: ed. published.). (1st . , Bucuresti: Editura Albatros,, Bucuresti: 1 Editura erience and the forging of a nation a of forging the and erience . London: Oxford University London: Oxford .

. Ias .

i: Institutul european,Institutul i: Bcrsi Editura Bucuresti: .

999. 120