Galery

1

As happens during every revolution in a captive region, the Greek territories also had different governing centres. On the one hand, they involved the traditional powers that had led the Greek people throughout the Ottoman period. These were the so-called "notables" or "kodjabashis", i.e. members of wealthier families. Rebels, or people who often violated the laws and were against any kind of power, especially against the Ottoman rule, acted in parallel with them. The other group involved the Phanariotes - a specific group composed of well-educated Greeks who came from the Phanar (lantern - author’s note) neighbourhood in Istanbul. They had extensive managerial experience since many of them had worked also in the Ottoman administration. Finally, we should mention a very specific category of people who were typical of the Greek revolution in 1821 alone compared with the uprisings in the past. I am talking about those radicals who arrived from Western Europe, especially from France, but also from other countries, where there was a Greek Diaspora, bringing the revolutionary ideas of the French Renaissance and the French Revolution. They acted on a conspiratorial basis and fought for the creation of a Greek state or for a Balkan revolution.

What role did the Church play in the liberation struggles of Bulgaria and Greece?

There are a lot of myths related to the role of the Church in all the revolutions in the Balkans. First of all we need to know that the Orthodox religion, both in the case of Greece and Bulgaria, was the only real constant of peoples under Ottoman rule. It was the only refuge of Christians. It saved their national consciousness and language. When the Greek revolution broke out it was very logical for the patriarch in Istanbul to have reservations about it because, under the laws of the empire, he was responsible to the authorities for the actions of his congregation and he did not want to do anything that could change for the worse the attitude towards Christians.

However, the course of the revolution shows that many hierarchs, usually from the middle and lower rank, took an active part in it. The same applies to the struggles of Bulgarians. However, the presence of objections, doubts or misunderstanding was quite logical if we consider the spirit of the age. How difficult it was for people, who held a specific post, to support a revolution.

Why did the Western powers intervene in Greece and Russia in Bulgaria in your opinion?

Russia intervened not only in respect of Bulgaria but also of Greece. The Greek state was created precisely as a result of the conflict of interest between Russia and Great Britain. Both major powers had begun to bid in the race to win the newly formed Greek state onto their side.

I would like to say first that Russia intervened not only in respect of Bulgaria but also of Greece. The Greek state was created precisely because of the conflict of interest between Russia and Great Britain. Both major powers had begun to bid in the race to win the newly formed Greek state onto their side. It was not a coincidence that Greece had three official "foreign" parties, as we call them, namely English, French and Russian. The Russian one involved even military leader of the Greek revolution Theodoros Kolokotronis. He and the other participants in the party relied on Russia because it professed the same religion.

In the case of Bulgaria, we should take into account the effects of the movement of Pan-Slavism which, after 1850, played a very important role in all processes in Eastern Europe. Russia wanted to create a large Bulgaria to play the role of a bridge to the southern Balkans, looking for an outlet on the warm seas of the Mediterranean region. Thus, San Stefano Bulgaria or Great Bulgaria was established in 1878 with the Treaty of San Stefano and the support of Russia, which existed for a short period of time. Its boundaries changed because of the response on the part of Great Britain which, being the largest naval power at that time, wanted to cooperate with Greece because they had common interests in shipping.

In the case of Bulgaria, Great Britain had no similar interests but that does not mean that it did not pay due attention to the struggles for national liberation there that had actually struck the British society. Especially after the massacre in Batak and elsewhere, the responses, including that of the British Parliament, were particularly negative towards the Ottoman Empire.

After their liberation, both countries did not include territories that belonged to them in their opinion. How did the processes of consolidation develop in the years that followed?