Courriers de Macédoine
TWENTY-SECOND CAHIER OF THE FOURTH SERIES
DISPATCHES FROM MACEDONIA
CAHIERS DE LA QUINZAINE appearing twenty times per year Paris 8, rue de la Sorbonne, ground floor
On the couriers of the cahiers --- couriers from China, couriers from Indochina, couriers from Japan, couriers from Finland, courier from Russia, cahier on Armenia, cahier on Romania, couriers from France --- published in the first three series of cahiers, refer to the Sixth cahier of the fourth series, the courier cahier, inventory of cahiers, in catalogue form, a cahier of 72 pages.
We shall publish in a cahier of the fifth series the summary listing of couriers published in the cahiers of the fourth series.
We ask our subscribers kindly to follow on the maps they have at their disposal; our dispatches will be accompanied by maps and plans as soon as we have the means.
Dispatches from Macedonia
Paris, Saturday 22 August 1903
This cahier of dispatches is not a book, but a collection of articles (1) written in the course of a hasty and uncomfortable journey. Their first defect is to have been written from day to day; their merit, to have been composed on the spot.
I would not venture to write a book, after two months’ stay in a country as vague (2) as Turkey, and on a question as complicated as the Macedonian question. One volume, besides, would not suffice. Several volumes would be necessary. But one would need to possess the question thoroughly. That is not yet my case.
I know all my ignorance. I have often blessed it. It has rendered me the greatest service. It has allowed me to see without being influenced.
(1) They appeared in Le Temps, from March to May, under the inadequate title, which I had not chosen, of Across Macedonia. (2) Turkey is a country where “two and two make approximately four.” Moravitz, The Finances of Turkey. --- An admirably precise definition.
Maurice Kahn
Upon disembarking at Salonika, I knew nothing of Macedonia, nothing of Turkey, nothing of the Eastern Question. I exaggerate a little, but not much. I had read, naturally, the excellent exposition of the Macedonian question, made in so clear, so complete and so impartial a fashion by M. Georges Gaulis in Pages Libres. (1) I had read by the same author an article entitled Bulgaria and Macedonia. (2) I knew the Yellow Book (3) published by M. Delcasse. Finally I had heard in Athens, during nearly a month, the ardent critique of this same Yellow Book, to which the Greeks reproached nothing less than bad faith, lies, forgeries.
So I knew nothing. But I was forewarned. The Yellow Book and the Greek politicians had presented me two contradictory theses. I distrusted both the one and the other. Ignorant and distrustful, I was, I believe, in an excellent posture to perceive the truth. Moreover, I was passionately seeking it, and without any interest but that of discovering it.
Desirous above all of setting forth precise facts, I was obliged necessarily to limit the field of my investigations. I concerned myself very little with the politics of the Powers. (4) I did not concern myself at all with the ethnographic question, and I renounced without regret the drawing up of a new statistic of the different Christian populations of Macedonia: I would not have arrived on this point at more exactness than my predecessors. Finally I deliberately neglected the detail of the daily encounters, always the same, and always as obscure, between the Bulgarian bands and the Turkish troops. It was invariably the case with all these affairs as with the Ichtip affair, which I chose as an example (1): two contradictory versions circulated, both “official,” emanating the first from the Turkish authorities, the second from the Bulgarian consulate or bishopric, and between which one could not discern the truth.
I concentrated my attention on what I could see for myself. I put myself in direct contact with things and with men. Of both I asked the deep and permanent causes of the situation. I reported the facts that struck me. I transcribed the very words that were spoken to me. I judged very little and intervened only to restore the indefinable, to try to preserve for things their color, for words their lived sonority.
I do not flatter myself with having attained the truth. But the general discontent that I provoked was to me the sweetest of satisfactions: the Turks found me bulgarophile; the Bulgarians, still indulgent toward the Turks; the Russians, not very kind to the Slavs; the Greeks, too favorable to Pan-Slavism. This unanimity assures me at least that I remained impartial.
The sincerity that I brought to my work, the conscience with which I conducted my various inquiries, give me reason to think that these documents taken from life are in their place in the collection of the cahiers.
Whatever care I took to verify scrupulously all my information, several errors crept into my articles. I have respected them. I have pointed out all those that have come to my knowledge. I have corrected only mistakes of spelling, printing and punctuation. For the rest I have added nothing, removed nothing, modified nothing. I have contented myself with indicating in notes the origin of the error committed, or to what extent the assertion, without being absolutely erroneous, is nevertheless not absolutely exact.
I have the duty, in concluding, and I do not wish to miss the pleasure, of thanking all those --- functionaries, publicists, diplomats and consuls, Turks and Europeans --- who helped me find my way in the inextricable confusion of interests that Macedonia is. Our French consuls will permit me to devote a particular remembrance to them: it is a rare fortune for the traveler to meet the effective assistance and the comforting welcome of M. Steeg at Salonika, of M. Choublier at Uskub, of M. Gautier at Monastir.
I wish finally to say here a personal word of gratitude to M. Georges Gaulis, who was long the correspondent of Le Temps at Constantinople, and who accomplished before me several journeys in the Balkan countries. I found everywhere the traces of his passage; and the memories he had left did not a little contribute to facilitating my stay and my work on that distant and so atrociously unhappy land.
Maurice KAHN
(1) Number 109, of 31 January 1903. (2) Revue de Paris, of 1 November 1902. (3) Diplomatic documents, Affairs of Macedonia. (4) I should like to touch on this important point in a second cahier, which would appear in the course of the fifth series, and would be entitled: Impressions of Constantinople.
Le Temps of Thursday 12 March, without title:
The Reforms at Monastir
Opinion and the reforms. --- The bands and the action of the committees. --- Administrative delays. --- Conversation with Riza Pasha.
Monastir, Friday 6 March:
The movement of public opinion, regarding the reforms, is not yet absolutely clear. People are waiting. In spite of some wavering, it seems nevertheless that the Austro-Russian note and the imperial irade are rather favorably received. The representatives of the Powers consider that the reforms are of a nature to restore peace in Macedonia. The Turks are delighted: the functionaries confess their joy at the prospect of receiving their salaries regularly. The Greeks are satisfied. Those I met last week in Athens rejected the reforms. “Reforms in Macedonia,” they said, “would be the prelude to a Bulgarian annexation! We are quite willing to have reforms, but general reforms that benefit all the Greeks of all the provinces of Turkey --- Epirus, Thrace, the islands.” And they went to war against the reforms before knowing what they would consist of. Are the Greeks of Athens, politicians and chauvinists to the extreme, today converted to the reforms? I do not know. But the Greek population of Macedonia is satisfied. It thinks that, if the Porte keeps its promises, the Bulgarian agitation will cease, and it hopes to be at last rid of the committees, from which it suffers as much as from the bad Turkish administration. The Bulgarian population would be equally satisfied. It is very unhappy: the little that it will obtain will be precious to it.
Official Bulgaria is distrustful. It does not believe that the reforms will be carried out. It regrets that the control of the Powers does not operate in an effective manner over the newly created general inspectorate. And it asks where the guarantees are.
As for the committees, it is clear that the reforms do not at all suit them. The bands, which had kept quiet in the vilayet of Monastir for about twenty days, have resumed their exploits.
Last Sunday, 1 March, at Ljoubona --- caza of Presba --- a band having been signaled, the gendarmerie came to attack it, under the command of Captain Osman-Aga. The band took refuge in two houses facing one another, while the inhabitants, Bulgarians, of the neighboring village --- Prototchina --- occupied the heights and fired on the gendarmerie, which, thus caught between two fires, had to yield its ground: two gendarmes had been killed, one wounded. The vali of Monastir had sent a troop of reinforcement commanded by a major, Riza bey. When this troop arrived at Ljoubona, the band had disappeared, and the inhabitants of Prototchina had abandoned their houses, no doubt to follow the band, which this day’s fighting would thus have considerably strengthened. The leader of the band, Kotte, was wounded; one man killed. It is said, moreover, that the Arsof band had cooperated in this affair with the Kotte band. (1)
The same day, a Serbianizing priest, who was going to the fair of Perlepe, was assassinated on the road from Monastir to Perlepe.
Yesterday, Thursday the 5th, between half past four and five o’clock in the evening, a Bulgarian, named Kouze, a blacksmith, originally from Smilovo, fired two revolver shots in the middle of the Monastir market at the Greek merchant Christodoumas, who refused to pay a sum demanded by a committee as a contribution.
Yesterday, also, a Bulgarian was found assassinated about a quarter of an hour from Monastir.
All these facts seem to indicate that the bands are disposed to make increasingly frequent appearances in this region. Will they attempt to rouse the country? Will they succeed? One could not say. But one seems to see, already, that the execution or the non-execution of the reforms will have the greatest influence, not perhaps on the attitude of the committees, but certainly on the success of their propaganda, and first of all on the recruitment of the bands.
The bands, it is observed, are currently formed of two elements: revolutionaries come from Bulgaria, most of them originally from Macedonia, and Macedonian peasants, who abandon their villages to enlist with their brothers. Now, on the one hand, the Bulgarian government has taken measures to prevent the crossing of the frontier; and, on the other hand, the Macedonian peasants enlist in the bands only because they are driven by poverty. From the day when they can live tranquilly at home, is it not to be expected that they will refuse the risks of revolutionary adventures? And, from then on, where will the bands recruit?
Moreover, it is added, the amnesty, if it is practiced in a broad manner, will certainly send back to their homes quantities of people who left them, having nothing to live on but their rifles.
Two objections are imposed upon this optimistic view. Among those released who will benefit from the amnesty, will not some return to the bands? (1) And above all, is there not reason to fear the quite natural impatience of the populations, who have been waiting so long for an improvement of their condition? The announcement of the reforms has made them hope for a radical and sudden change of things. But such complex reforms cannot be carried out overnight. The Macedonian peasants are simplistic: expecting much and seeing nothing significant happen, will they not believe themselves duped once more? And if the committees skillfully exploit the clumsy delays of the administration, will not the recruitment of the bands be facilitated anew by the discouragement and anger of the populations?
This is a very grave danger, for the committees have perfectly seen the advantage they could draw from the distrust of the populations regarding Turkish sincerity, and already minds, satisfied in the first days, seem today more anxious.
I have the regret of observing that the administration is doing nothing to counterbalance the campaign of the committees. That the reforms cannot be carried out overnight is quite evident. The financial reform, particularly, which is the most important, requires a rather delicate work of organization. Ramis bey, inspector of finances for the three vilayets, is charged with preparing it. (1) But of this office work the populations see nothing, know nothing. For them nothing is being done.
The administration would have been well advised to find some means of affirming, with some distinction, its good will, its firm intention to carry out very shortly the promised reforms. On the contrary, whether from real ill will or simple clumsiness, the administration gives the impression of dallying and doing little. The vali is reproached for not having, in the administrative councils of the vilayet, made the slightest allusion to the imperial irade. The Bulgarian bishop and the Greek bishop sit on this council: the occasion was good for a significant declaration.
However, Riza Pasha, whom I saw today, assured me that the reforms would be carried out. “Already,” he told me, “seven Christian police agents have begun their service; there will be others; but we are obliged to proceed cautiously, taking into account capacities, the assessments of doctors, etc., and that requires time.” As for the judicial reform, the new prosecutors and presidents have arrived at Monastir and are installed; they are all graduates, at least holders of a law degree.
The amnesty is being carried out little by little: 90 prisoners were released today; 10 will be tomorrow; the process will continue in the following days. The prisoners released this morning reportedly got into carriages with cries of: “Long live the Sultan!”
Finally, some days ago already, Riza Pasha --- and it was not from him that I got this information --- gathered the mukhtars --- mayors --- of the various villages, and announced to them that henceforth the inhabitants of each village would themselves choose their field guard.
It seems, then, that the imperial government is disposed to keep its promises. It has the appearance of it. But it is incontestable that it complies with very bad grace. The ambassadors of the Powers are currently discussing at Constantinople the manner in which the control of the consuls in Macedonia will be established; it would perhaps not be useless for their conference to arrive at a prompt and effective result. (1)
Le Temps of Saturday 21 March, without title:
The Work of Hilmi Pasha at Uskub
Uskub, Monday 16 March
I was in great haste to arrive at Uskub. The vali of Monastir, Riza Pasha, had told me, speaking of the reforms: “We have begun. For the rest, we are waiting for Hilmi Pasha.” Now, Hilmi Pasha is at Uskub. He has been there for more than three months. One will understand my impatience to see at work the inspector general of the provinces of Roumelia, the high functionary charged by H. M. the Sultan with overseeing the execution of the reforms, the man upon whom, at this hour, depends for so great a part the pacification --- at least provisional --- of Macedonia.
Hilmi Pasha is hardly more than forty-eight or forty-nine years old. He looks older. The black hair is graying; the beard, thick on the cheeks and cut to a point, is abundantly sprinkled with silver threads. A bony and emaciated face, a yellow complexion, large eyes, which appeared to me brown, very grave and rather gentle, a brow clouded with worry, a fine mouth that smiles sadly, long, delicate and nervous hands, a simple dress, a deep and harmonious voice, infinitely few gestures --- such is his outward person. On closer acquaintance, one discovers a will, without phrases and without brilliance, but energetic and passionate. He expresses himself in French, with some difficulty at times, when it is a matter of formulating certain ideas, with precision always, and a perfect knowledge of administrative vocabulary.
I am told that he works fourteen hours a day. One of his secretaries told me: “He does more all by himself than all of us together.” That does not surprise me: first, because the secretaries work little --- in Turkey --- but above all because I saw the inspector at his work. I saw him, seated before a table laden with dossiers, cigarettes, hot and cold beverages, ceaselessly offered and ceaselessly renewed --- coffee, tea, liqueurs, orangeade, etc. --- receive, while we were talking, ten visitors in two hours’ time, give orders to ten secretaries or officers, distribute or explain the work to them, as papers reached him, read, examine, annotate, sign, criticize twenty dispatches or reports, in a very clear tone and without departing from an absolute courtesy.
He is liked by his subordinates and almost popular among them. His appointment was received with hope and confidence by the rare Turks who sincerely wish to see the situation of the country improve. The others detest him. All fear him. As for the Christian populations, they do not know. The partisans of the inspector invoke as proof of his administrative capacities the five years he spent in Yemen, as vali. They praise his honesty, which appears undisputed, his liberalism, which appears well established. The consuls themselves are unanimous in declaring that “if anyone can act in Macedonia, it is Hilmi Pasha.”
Hilmi Pasha arrived at Uskub on 13 December 1902. In three months, what has he done? What does he intend to do still? It goes without saying that if, on the second point, I contented myself with asking him his own plans, on the first point, on the contrary, I carefully verified the inspector’s information, addressing myself by preference to the persons most directly interested and least disposed to indulgence.
The first cares of Hilmi Pasha were given to the gendarmerie and the police. The old gendarmes were retired, bad gendarmes who had been guilty of brutalities, thefts, exactions were dismissed; men well noted during their military service were enrolled; and a certain number of officers were replaced by officers from the infantry corps. The Christian element was introduced into the police and the gendarmerie, but in a small proportion: --- police, 10 percent in the sandjak of Uskub; gendarmerie, 20 percent in the vilayet; there still remain some gendarmerie posts for future applications. --- It should be noted that if 10 percent of the policemen of the sandjak are Christian --- 22 out of 202, exactly 10.89 percent --- the chiefs are all Muslim.
Then, to ensure the security of the vilayet, the pursuit of malefactors who had never been pursued was undertaken.
[The dispatches continue with detailed reports from Salonika, Uskub, and Monastir, covering: the state of Ottoman administrative reforms; encounters between Bulgarian revolutionary bands and Turkish troops; the ethnic and religious tensions between Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian, and Turkish populations; the role of the European consuls in monitoring reforms; interviews with Ottoman officials including Hilmi Pasha; visits to prisons and courts; observations on the condition of peasants in the countryside; the workings of the Bulgarian revolutionary committees; and an assessment of whether the promised reforms stand any chance of pacifying the region. Kahn provides firsthand accounts of specific incidents, conversations with local leaders of all factions, and nuanced portraits of the Ottoman administrators tasked with carrying out reform.]