What's new Main list of maps Search Buy maps FAQ

Plate 37 from Die Bulgaren in ihren historischen, ethnographischen und politischen Grenzen by Ishirkoff & Zlatarski Index no. 0048:0037
The Map of the "Disputed Teritory" (1912)  —  Ligne de Partage d'après la carte annexée au Traité d'Alliance

The green-bordered text below is is the English version of the explanatory text, from the page facing the map. Another page on this site gives the full text in German, English, French, and Bulgarian.

37. – The Map of the "Disputed Teritory" (1912).

We borrow this map from the report of the well-known Carnegie-Commission of 1913 that made an inquiry into the outrages committed during the Balkan wars. Our reasons for publishing it are twofold:
    a) to make evident the boundaries of the so-called "disputed territory" of Macedonia that should have been divided between Bulgaria and Servia according to the arbitration of the Russian Emperor, and
    b) an order to put an end to the Servian legend that all Macedonia is "disputed territory". But we consider ourselves obliged to remark, that the map is not quite accurate concerning the western frontier, because the "disputed territory" ended behind the townlet Struga and comprised no territory west of the Ochrida-lake.

lt must be known that according to Art. 2 of the "secret supplement" to the treaty of alliance between Servia and Bulgaria of the 29th of February 1912 (old style) Servia acknowledged Bulgaria's undisputed right to the territory east of the Rhodopies and the river Struma, whereas Bulgaria conceded to Servia the same right to the territory north and west of the Schar-planina. Concerning Macedonia, i.e. "the territory between Schar-Planina and the Rhodopies, the Archipelagus and Ochrida-lake" (quoting word for word from the "secret supplement") Servia engaged herself to attempt nothing this side of a line which separated the "disputed territory" from the rest of Macedonia. – The reader may convince himself of this, if he re-reads this treaty of alliance and its "secret supplement" in the French paper "Le Matin" of the 24th of November 1913. Besides, even the ideologist of the Servian aspirations in Macedonia, Professor Zwiitsch, confirms this an an article published by him in the English paper "Review of Reviews" of october 1912. – An authoritative dementi of the above-mentioned legend followed, too, on the part of the Servian government of Mr. Paschitsch himself in as much as he demanded a "revision" of the treaty of alliance with Bulgaria, which would have been perfectly superfluous if all Macedonia had been "disputed territory".

The thought of dividing Bulgarian Macedonia with whomsoever appeared always sacrilegious to every Bulgarian and, therefore, it is absolutely necessary to explain at this place why Bulgarian statesmen agreed finally to quch a division, when they consented, that the northwestern part of Macedonia should be counted as "disputed territory" between Srrvia and Macedonia.

Tie motives for this sacrilege on the part of Bulgarian statesmen, who assisted at the conclusion of the treaty of alliance between Servia and Bulgaria of 1912 were as follows:
    1. These statesmen were fully convinced that the Pan-lslamitic policy of the Young-Turks would not only impede the free national developement and that of Bulgarian culture, but that it would systematically force the Bulgarians to leave Macedonia and emigrate to Bulgaria, – a circumstance that would have changed the ethnological character of Macedonia in the very nearest future.
    2. The same statesmen were just as deeply convinced that Bulgaria would not have been in a position to warrant the free national existence and the free drvelopment of the Bulgarians of Macedonia without their liberation from Turkish lordship – to attain which was impossible without an alliance at leapt with Servia, – as otherwise Bulgaria, in case of a war with Turkey would have run the danger of having all her Balkan-neighbours against her as, indeed, has been the case in 1913.
    3. These statesmen believed sincerely that, in order to maintain an alliance between Servia and Bulgaria, which was very necessary for Russia, this latter – as creator of the Bulgaria of St. Stefano – would only give to Servia the Uescupland out of the "disputed territory", this was declared by Hartwig, the Russian Minister at Belgrade to all Bulgarians whom he met at that time.
    4. These statesmen knew positively well that Servia soon would try to annex Montenegro – even Bosnia and Herzegowina. Such an attempt would have raised a conflict between Servia and Austria-Hungary, and Servia would have been forced to cede of her own accord the Uescub district to Bulgaria for her neutrality. - Taking into consideration that the foreign policy of any state would be impossible without certain concessions, the above mentioned motives for this case justify the "crime" of Bulgarian statesmen, the more so because Servia had acknowledged in the treaty of alliance the right of Bulgaria to nearly all Macedonia. Looked at in this light there remains of all the "crime" only a political pragmatism justified by the events.

Keywords: MacedoniaBulgariaMacedonia

You can buy a higher-resolution version of this scan for $10: see the price list.