BALKAN H1STORIOG~PHY 237
III lit" ('as(' of' lht' Bulgarian national movement, which gained
9. BALKAN HISTORIOGRAPHY RELATED TO THE
OTTOMAN E:\lPIRE SI~CE 1945*
FIKRET ADANIR
Ruhr Uni\'ersity, Bodmlll
I lIaliollal qllestiol1 was not resolved by a political compromise artic-
Because the historical sciences in the Balkans have developed along
lines determined by the needs of the nation-states emerging there
since the nineteenth century, an understanding of nation-state for-
mation is essential to understanding how historical tradition has
evolved in this part of Europe, The liberation struggles in Ottoman
Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria originated in rural conflicts in which
semi-military elements such as haiduks, mart%s, or armatoli were promi-
nent-a circumstance that may account for the "chetnik mentality"
widespread in the Balkans ever since. I E\'en in the Greek case, where
a relatively developed "national bourgeoisie" stood behind the insur-
rectionary movement, it was hardly their aim to establish a small
Greek state at the southern tip of the Balkan peninsula. On the con-
trary, the urban commercial groups hoped, together with the Phanariote
aristocracy, to transform Ottoman rule into a Greek-controlled, multi-
ethnic, oriental empire, Intellectuals such as Adamantios Korais or
Rhigas Velestinlis, too, seem to have thought in "imperialist" cate-
gories, envisioning a Greek "republic" which would include the
Balkans, the Archipelago, and Asia lVIinor.::!
* A revised version of this text appear:ed in Toplurn ve Bilirn, no. 83 (Winter
1999/2000), pp. 221-240, under the title "Ikinci Diinya Sava~i sonraSl Balkan tarih
yazmmda Osmanh Imparatorlugu".
I Gale Stokes, "The Absence of :.'\ationalism in Serbian Politics before 1840:'
Canadian Review qf Studies in Nationalism. 4 (1976): 77-90; Lawrence P. Meriage, "The
First Serbian Uprising (1804-1813): National Reyi\'al or a Search for Regional
Security," Ibid., 4 (1977): 187-205; Hans-Michael '\liedlig, "Patriarchalische Mentalitat
als Hindernis fUr die staatliche und gesellschaftliche .\Iodernisierung in Serbien im
19. Jahrhundert," Siidost-Forschungen 50 (1991): 163-90; Dimitrije Djordjevic, "The
Role of the Military in the Balkans in the Nineteenth Century," Der Berliner Kongress
von 1878. Die Politik der Grossmiichte ulld die Probleme da Jlodemisierung ill Siidosteuropa ill
der Zlaiten Hiilfte des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. Ralph .\lehille and Hans~lirgen Schroder
(Wiesbaden, 1982), 317-47.
2 See Notis Botzaris, Visions balkam'ques dans fa preparation de la revolution grecqlle
1I101llt'II1UI1I OllieI' the Crimean War, one can discern influences of a
dilli')'('111 socio-political setting, On the one hand, in their struggle
i1),!;i1iIlSI (;n'('k ('cdesiastical and cultural dominance, the Bulgarians
('V('II ('olll1l('d on the support of the Ottoman reform bureaucracy;
011 Iht' other hand, they no longer received protection from Russia,
Ih(' 10StT or tite Clilllcan War, but from the liberal West. Consequently
('IIItT),!;il1),!; hour),!;t'ois 01' petit-bourgeois elements within Bulgarian soci-
ely had a hettcr chance of asserting themselves. Again, however, the
IIlalillg' Ihe intcrnal dynamics of the civil society, but as a result of
all ('xleJ'llal I~l('t()r, the victory of the Tsarist armies.
Nation-statl' It>rlnation in Ottoman Europe was hardly a corollary
of hourg'l'ois aspirations for social and political emancipation. Inde-
pendencc attained in the wake of an Ottoman military defeat heaved
the most militant factions of the elites to the forefront, creating
lIation-states bcf()re the civilian bases of corresponding national soci-
eties had de\'Cloped. .:\'ew rulers had to embark upon daring pro-
jects of nation-building from above, and historical scholarship found
itself in a predominantly ideological role. 3 Creating historical tradi-
tions--and the interpretation the Ottoman period received in that
context-not only legitimized the new regimes internally, but also
justified them externally vis-a.-vis a European world that cherished
its own notions of nationhood and was eager to dispatch its princes,
generals, bankers or missionaries into the region. The romantic con-
cept of the uniqueness of nation, the novel idea of nationhood based
on language, the employment of history in support of irredentist pro-
jects and similar modern concepts thus entered the Balkans. As a
result, the Balkan states from their inception were bent on reattain-
ing their medieval or ancient grandeur, and even present-day conflicts
are vindicated, internally and internationally, with reference to impe-
rial inspirations from the past. 4
(J 789-1821) Geneya and Paris, 1962), 183-209; Apostolos Daskalakes. To politeuma
tou Riga Beltstinli. ProtOI/ slllltagma ellinws dimokratias kai eleutheras diabiose os ton Balkanikoll
laon (Athens, 1976: and the contributions in Richard Clogg, ed., Balkan Sociery in
the Age qf Greek II/depel/dence Totowa, l'{J, 1981).
3 Paschalis .\1. Kitromilides, "'Imagined Communities' and the Origins of the
National Question in the Balkans," European History Oyarter!>, 19 (1989:: 149-9,1.
i Stefan TroebsL "F1uchtpunkt San Stefano-Nationalism us in Bulgarien," Die
Neue GesellsrhafllFranlfllrter Hdie 37 (1990): 405·-14; Wol(~ang Hlipken, "Geschichte
238 FIKRET ADANIR
The nineteenth-century European image of Ouoman rulc, there-
fore, has direct relevance for the emcrging Balkan historiographics.
Philhellenic sentiments of the post-Napolconic cra fostcred in thc
West a deep interest for thc fortuncs of subject populations in south-
eastern Europe. Evcn the positivist school, long creditcd fl.))" its impar-
tiality and critical invcstigation of historical qucstions, indulgcd in
swceping gencralizations that confirmcd curoccntric theoretical con-
structs and prcjudices against "extcrnal principlcs" such as "Islam"
or "Asia." For instance, Rankc "nevcr lost sight of thc Ottoman
Empirc," which to him reprcscnted "thc classical Oricntal opposite."
Even in a work as unrelatcd to the Ottomans as his History f!f the
Germanic and Roman Peoples (1824) and in his Serbian Revolution (1829),
Ranke himself admitted that he intcnded to make a material con-
tribution to the Serbian cause. s Likewise, an observer as sympathetic
as Joseph von Hammer could not desist, when judging the Ottomans,
from assuming the stance of a morally and intellectually superior
European upon reaching the period of the first 'Vestemizing influences
in his multi-volume history. Hc could not help but exclaim: "Both
the author and the reader of Ottoman history can finally breathe
more freely ... In warm contact with European politics and culture,
at least the edges of the rigid ice crust of the Turk is thawing, and
a gentler breeze of humane mildness and civilization is blowing."6
In the 1830s Fallmerayer's "Slavic theory" led to a preoccupation
with the earliest historical periods in order to establish "national unique-
ness" and generate from past grandeur fresh hopes for the future
of the respective nations. 7 The contemporary misery experienced in
und Gewalt: Geschichtsbewusstsein im jugosla\\ischen Konflikt," Intemationale Schul-
buclifOrschung 15 (1993): 55-73.
:; See Ernst Schulin, Die weltgeschichtliche Eifassullg des Orients bei Hegel und Ranke
(Gottingen, 1958), 157, and Fritz Valjavec, "Ranke und der Sudosten," Ausgewiihlte
Aujsiitze, ed. Karl August Fischer and Mathias Bernath '~hmich, 1963), 82-103,
here p. 83.
G "Endlich kann der Schreiber and Leser osmanischer Geschichte freyer aufath-
men ... Die starre Eisrinde des Turkenthumes thallet wenigstens von aussen auf,
in dem warmen Verkehre europaischer Politik and Cultur, es weht ein sanfterer
Hauch menschlicher Milde und feiner Gesittung," Geschiclite des Osmanischen Reiches,
vol. 7 (Pest, 1831), 1-2.
7 William St. Clair, 7hat Greece Might Still Be Free: the Philhellenes in the War qf
Independence (London, 1972); David Howarth, the Greek .4dl'enture: Lord B)'Ton and Other
Eccentrics in the War qf Independence (London, 1976,. See also Emanuel Turczynski, "In-
novationsimpulse des Philhellenismlls fur die Geschichts\\issenschaft in Deutschland
BAI.KAN HISTORIOGRAPHY 239
ewry ('01'1\('1' of' the Peninsula could be conveniently attributed to
()ttolllilll 0(T1'I)CItioll . .Jin~(':ek's "History of the Bulgarians" (1875),
"written ill till' hest tradition of nineteenth-century European histo-
l'iogTaphy:' illtl'Odll('cd notions of thc "Turkish yoke" into the Balkan
S(,(-II<"II alld it Ii-II to Nicolac Iorga to state (ironically in the year of
thc YOllng- Turk Revolution of 1908) that despite rcmarkable efforts
to rdill'lII stall- and society, the Ottomans were, in part because of the
rig-idity or Islalll, doomed to f~lil. Iorg-a thought that although the Turkish
hody politic still showed signs of life (der tiirkische Staatskiirper lebt noch),
the 'l'mkish soul was long dead (Aher die tiirkische Seele ist ... erloschen). 9
II
The record or post-\Vorld 'Var II Balkan historiography of the
()ttoman period also should be viewed against this background. The
conUllllnist parties that wcre installed in power in most countries of
the region assigned to history the task of educating the people in
"proletarian internationalism" and "socialist patriotism." The parti-
sanship of the historian, categorically disparaged elsewhere, was sud-
denly in high esteem, but the orthodox Marxist stand did not last
long. As early as 1948-49 the breach between Tito and Stalin sig-
naled divergent approaches to national history within the party.
Similar modifications in official policy took place in other Balkan
countrics after 1956. In Bulgaria, the turn of the tide came in 1960
when Todor Zivkov, as the first secretary of the party, asked histo-
rians to contribute to the creation of socialism, stressing that "we can
be rightly proud of the heroic past of the Bulgarian people, of their
centuries old culture, of their centuries old struggle against the oppres-
sors, for self-preservation and development, for national liberation." 10
und Griechenland," in Der Philhellenismus und die Modemisierung in Griechenland und
Deutsch/and (Thessaloniki, 1986), 9-28; idem, "Von den Einflussen der F reiheits-
be\\"egllngen auf die Anfange der deutschen Siidosteuropaforschung," in Siidosteuropa
in der Wahmehmung der deutschen Qjftntlichkeit vom Wiener Kongress (1815) bis ZUlli Pariser
Frieden (1856), ed. J. ~Iatesic and K. Heitmann (~Iunich, 1991), 65-80.
8 ~Iaria Todorova, "Bulgarian Historical Writing on the Ottoman Empire,"
Nel(' Perspectives 011 Turke), 12 (1995): 97-118, here pp. 108-09. Constantin Jirecek
wrote, of course, also a "History of the Serbs": Geschichte der Serben, vols. I and 2
(Gotha, 1911-1918).
~, Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches, vol. I (Gotha, 1908), Preface.
10 T odor Zivkov, b:.braT/i su Cinenija l' osem lorna, \"01. 4 (Sofia, 1971), 231, as quoted

24·0 FIKRET ADANIR
In 19GB the party commissioned historians to write a multi-volume
IIiJtory (!/ /Ju/'t.:aria, which was expected to fc)ster "socialist patriotism
and proletarian internationalism." "Socialist patriotism" Wit", of course,
a euphemism Icu' outright nationalism, and "proletarian internation-
alism" was understood gCJlcrally as a call to stress the special rela-
tionship to Russia or the Soviet Union. I I l\larxist methodoloh'Y, which
induded the periodization of universal history according to modes
of production, necessitated some new approaches to the Ottoman
period of national histOlY. For example, it seemed especially impor-
tant to establish the main characteristics of the Ottoman feudal
system, to ascertain which social IcuTes had been "progressive" under
Ottoman rule, and to determine under exactly what conditions the
passage from fl~udalism to capitalism had occurred. Proper answers
to these questions had a bearing upon the stand of the party of the
proletariat in relation to both imperialism and "reactionary" bour-
geois elements within the emerging socialist society.
Yugoslav Marxist historians played the leading role in reinter-
preting the Ottoman past. One of the first questions they tackled
was why so little resistance was put up against the Ottoman inva-
sion after the fourteenth century. Whereas the Greek historiography
after \Vorld War II tended to blame the lay and ecclesiastical elites
for having undermined the capacity for popular resistance, Marxian
analysis of feudal relations, especially in Bosnia, revealed some sig-
nificant new details. 12 Viewing the Ottoman conquest in a class con-
text, it pointed out that primarily the autochthonous feudal lords
had come under attack, while the peasantry was promised freedom
from servitude, and such agitation had been particularly successful
among pastoral groups. As a result, around the middle of the six-
teenth century Croatian noblemen had to petition King Ferdinand
to emancipate the peasantry, as thousands had already deserted their
farmsteds to fiee to Turkish territory.13
in Wolfgang-Uwe Friedrich, "Die bulgarische Geschichtswissenschaft im Spannungs-
verhaltnis zwischen ideologischem Anspruch und historischer Realirat. Die Geschichts-
schreibung der Befreiungsbewegung und der Anfange des Nationalstaates," Jalzrbiidzer
iiir Gesclziclzte Osteuropas 29 (1981): 412-35, here p. -!-14.
II Ibid., 416.
12 For the "betrayal" thesis see Basilike Papoulia, "Die Osmanenzeit in der griechi-
schen Geschichtsforschung seit der Cnabhangigkeit." in Die Staaten Siidosteuropas und
die OJmanen, ed. H.G. Majer ~Iunich, 1989), 113-26, here p. 117.
13 See Nedim Filipovic, "Pogled na osmanski feudalizam (s posebnim obzirom na
•
BALKAN HISTORIOGRAPJ!lY 241
Rc's('arch WitS concentrated on social groups that supposedly had
"collahorated" with the enemy, particularly on the popula,tion in the
category "Vlach."11 All Balkan historiographies focused on their sta-
IllS wilhin, and runctions fi)r, the Ottoman system, producing a large
alllount or literature in all historical and related fields. I') How could
a Marxist historiography incorporate into the national identity these
mol'(' or less privileged groups positioned between the ruling class
and the taxahle peasantry (the so-called mutif'reqya)? Autochthonous
Christian soldiers dd<'~nding Ottoman frontiers or persecuting Christian
hrigands in the countl)'side,IIi Christian peasants guarding mountain
passt~s (derlJfluki), extracting tar, producing gunpowder or breeding
agral'lll' OclIlOS(,\," ('·/ldi.\~/!iak hlo17'Jkog Druflva BOJne i Hl'rregol'ine 4 (1952): 5-146, here
pp. (i7 (iB.
11 ~ke Nil'oarii Beldiccanu, "Les Roumaines a la bataille d'Ankara," SiidoJ/-
J.i/l:I'dulIlgt'll I,' (19:"):i): ,H,150.
I~, TIll' Olllpllt of literature on populations of the sociohistorical category of Vlach
and of related pastoral groups such as the Yiiriik, Karakacan, Tsintsar, Saracatsan,
etc, reaches remarkable dimensions. This may han~ to do also with the fact that
groups with Vlachian background continue to occupy a conspicuous part in the
ethno-political structure of the present-day populations. A selection of titles would
include ~lilenko Filipovic, Simpozijulll 0 JredTgevjekozl/lolll kalul/u, odrzan 2-1 i 25 novell/-
bra 1961 g. (Saraje\'o, 1963); Branislav Djurdjev, "Teritorijalizacija katunske orga-
nizacije do kraja X\' veka," in Naucno druflvo SR Boslle i Hercegovine, Poseblla izdallie,
vol. 2, Otijelj. bl. -jilolofkilz lIauka, vol. 1 (Sarajevo, 1963), 143-70; Idem, "Znacaj
podataka 0 viasima u popisu Krajista Isa-bega Ishakovica 1455. godine," Godiflljak
Druflva Istomara BoslIe i Hercegovine 15 (1966): 63-78;JO\'an F. Trifunoski, "Die heutigen
aromunischen 'Katunen' in Mazedonien," Sonderausgaben der rvisJenJchajlliclze71 GeJellschafl
SR BoslIifll-Her:c.egOl·ina 2 (1963): 200-202; idem, "Die Aromunen in ~razedonien:'
Balcallica 2 (1971): 337--47; Dominik Mandic, "Postanak vlaha. NO\'a povjesna
istraiivanja," in idem, Rasprave i prilozi iz Jlare IzroalJke povijesti (Rome, 1963,515-67;
Georges B. Kavadias, PasteurJ-nomadeJ medilerraneenJ. LeJ SaracatJanJ de Crece (Paris,
1965); Nicoani Beldiceanu, "Sur les Valaques des Balkans slaves a l'epoque ottomane
(1450-1550)," Revue d'EtudeJ blamiqueJ 34 (1964): 83-132; idem and I. Beldiceanu-
Stein herr, "Quatre actes de Mehmed II concernant les Valaques des Balkans slaves,"
SUdoJt-Forsc!zullgen 24 (1965): 103-18; Dragoslav Antonijevic, "Les rites magiques re-
latifs a la transhumance chez les Sop," Balcanica 2 (1971): 357-72; Mirko ~rarkovic,
"0 iivotu i obicajima stoeara na Vlasieu," Balcanica 8 (1977): 671-80: Demetrius
Dvoichenko-~rarkov, "The Vlachs: The Latin Speaking Population of Eastern
Europe," /h'zalltion 54 (1984): 508-26; Aleksandar ;\latkovski, "About the \\'allachian
Livestock Breeding Organization in the Balkans with Special Attention to Katun, ,.
Review/ Glasnik XXXI (ii) 3 (2) (1987): 199-221; Metodije Sokoloski, "Za jurucite i
juruekata organizacija vo Makedonija od XV-XVIII wk," btorija 9, no. I (1973:
pp. 85-99; Z. Pimpireva, Karakafanite v Bulgarija. Ot nOll/adstvo kum uJednaloJt (Sofia.
1995).
16 Milan Vasic, "Die Martolosen im Osmanischen Reich," <eitJclzrijljiir BalkaniJtiJ:
2 (1964): 172-89; idem, AlartoloJi a jugoJlovenJkim zemljama pod turskom lI/adaz:inoll/ Saraje\·o.
1967).
242 I,'IKIU:'!' AI>ANllt
h()rs(~s I()I' the Ottonlan :ll'IlIy,17 local Christian lords or ('wn priests
holding' timar,l' and thus participatillg' in the f,,'udal r(,lIt III sllch a pic-
tun~ dearly contradicted the illlag'c of a population Sllm~rillg' Ulld('l'
the "Turkish yok('."
It was quickly detcrmined that the Christian g'roups were 1I0t r(,:llIy
privih~g'('d. Theil' tax illllllllllities wcre ill rcality a kind of I"~udal­
rent-converted-illto-statc-service that nevcr entailed a reduction in
the amount of the 1(~lI(tal rent itself: I!I That the Ottoman peasant ry
enjoyed, at least during' the sixteenth century, better conditions of
lifc than the peasantry in neig'hhoring European countries was attrih-
uted to an underdeveloped--versus developed -fcudal system. Because
Ottoman rule meant a somewhat archaic level of agrarian relations,
it produced a relatively low level of peasant exploitation. According'
to some programmatic articles of the early 1950s, the military fcu-
dalism of the Ottomans symbolized by the term lima,. had actually
hindered the development of productive forces in the Balkan coun-
tries.:.w In time, this interpretation became widespread. For example,
in regard to Hungary it was asserted that the Ottoman system "nipped
in the bud the beginnings of large-scale agricultural production,"
I; Branislav Djurdjev, "0 vojnucima (sa osvrtom na razvoj turskog feudalizma i
na pitanje bosanskog agaluka)," Glasnik Zemaijskog mu;::eja u Sarajevu 2 (1947): 75-137;
idem, Turska vlast u Grnqj Gori u XVI i XVII veku. Prilog jednog nereferzot pita,yu iz nafe
islorije (Sarajevo, 1953); Bistra Cvetkova, "K voprosu 0 polozenii dervendzijskogo
naselenija v bolgarskich zemljach v period tureckogo gospodstva," Ulerzye zapiski
Inslituta slavjanovedenija 20 (1960): 196-220; eadem with N. Popov, "Novi dokumen-
talni danni za solarstvoto po Juznoto biilgarsko cemomorie ot XV v," /zvestija na
A!uzeite ot JugOiztoc11a Biilgarija, vol. 5 (Plovdiv, 1982), 89-131; Aleksandar Stojanovski,
Deroendl:,istvoto va Makedonija (Skopje, 1974); idem, Rf!ja so specijalni sadoLZenija 1J(} Makedonija
(vqjnuci, sokolari, Olizari i solari) (Skopje, 1990).
18 Bistra Cvetkova, "Novye dannye 0 christianach-spachijach na Balkanskom polu-
ostrove v period tureckogo gospodstva," Vizantijski vremerznik 13 (1958): 184-97.
19 Vera P. Mutaicieva, "Kategoriite feodalno zavisimo naselenie v naSite zemi
pod turska vlast prez XV-XVI v.," hvestija na Instituta za istorija pri Biilgarskata akade-
mija na naukite 9 .1960): 57-93, here p. 70. This view is supported also by Elena
Grozdanova, "Bevolkerungskategorien mit Sonderpflichten und Sonderstatus - nach
um'eroffentlichten osmanisch-tiirkischen Dokumenten der Orient-Abteilung der
l'\ationalbibliothek," in Osmanistische Studien zur Wirtschtifts- und Sozialgesehichte, ed. H.G_
~Iajer, (Wiesbaden, 1986), 46-67, here p. 51.
~) Branislav Djurdjev, "Prilog pitanju razvitka i karaktera tursko-osmanskog feu-
dalizma-timarsko-spahijskog uredjenja," Godif,yak Istoriskog Druftva Bosne i Hercegovi11e
I 1949): 101-167: idem, "0 uticaju turske vladavine na razvitak nasih naroda," ibid_
2 1950): 19-82. See also Wayne S. Vucinich, "The Yugoslav Lands in the Ottoman
Period: Postwar ~larxist Interpretations of Indigenous and Ottoman Institutions,"
Journal qf Modern History 27 (1955): 287-305.
11:\1 ,',AN '''S'!'( II{IO(lI{"'PHY 243
and. hy 1I0t allowillg p,'opl'rly rig'hts on land, it "maintained both
('conoillic alld sodal dl'\'I'loPlIlI'lIt, as late as the 17th century, at the
stag(' or ('ady !"lId"lisllI,., ill the whole territory under Turkish
1'lIit-." 'I
There \\';lS also IIlI' rl';tlil Y (II' popular resistance. In Bulgaria, from
the start a (:hrisli;1I1 pllplll;llioll always ready to rebel was posited,
and h('J'oislIl ill ('(lllIhal a,~aillsl the invading enemy became a leit-
motif ill historical lil('l'allll'C','!'! E\'l'1I the crusade of 1444, which ended
ncar Val'lla with tht' ddi'al or Ihe Christian army, was styled as "la
ha/ail/I' 1IIt'lIIl1mhll' tit's /lm/,It.I ... ·.'t I kspite such idealizations, research in
anti-fi.'lulal resistancc did olkr new insights in social history.24 An
intCl'estillg o;';lIIlpl(' is 111(' sludy hy Nedim Filipovic on "Prince Musa
and Sheikh lkdn'ddin" or thl' l'arly fifteenth century, which addresses
the cOlltradictiolls hl't\\'('t'll thl' "'i.'udal class" and the "plebians" on
a broad~'r cOlln'ptual basis, illcluding also the dimension of religious
(l\lllslim as well as Christiall) heterodoxy?; A special focus in this
context has always l)('clI thc phl'nomenon of heiducry: were heiducs-
haidlle--or kkphts ill the southern parts of the Peninsula-ordinary
"social balldits" \Hohsha\\,m), or forerunners of national guerilla,
anticipating', as it wc\"t', thl' partisans of World \Var II? During the
early post-war period \"Omalltic interpretations portrayed heiducs as
similar to latter-day militias,~ti but with time a more differentiating
~I Gyula KiJdy-::\"agy. "The Elkct of the Timar System on Agricultural Production
in Hungary," Sludia Turcim \Budapest. 1971), pp. 241-48, here p. 248. For a char-
acterization of the 11I1Iar system as a "barbarian-despotical form of feudalism," see
Zsigmond Pat Pach. Die ullgarisdlf Agrarentwieklung im 16_-17_ Jahrhundert. Abbiegung vom
wesieuropiiisc!lfll ElIf7.l'iddullgsgallg \Budapest 1964), 15. For an analysis of the Ottoman
system in relation to Bulgaria see \'era ~lutalcieva, Agramile otnoferzija v Osmanskata
improja prez .\T-Xn c_ \Sofia, 1962).
~:? Bistra C"etkO\·a. GfT'oicllala sliprolim na Biilgarite protw TursJ.ite nafestvenici (Sofia,
1960: Gii rkmla i .l'ii prolimla lIa bIilgarskija narod sreStu osmanskoto igo. Jubileerz sbornik po
slucaj 100 g. 01 OS"obo~denie/o, (Sofia, 1981); Svilen Stanimirov, Politiceskata dejnost na
Bii/ganlf kalo/iei pre::, 30-lei 70-le godilli lIa XVII vek, KUm istorijala na biilgarskata antios-
manska sfprolim (Sofia, 1988'_
~~ Bistra C\·etkO\-a. La balaille memorable des peuples. I.e sud-esl europeen et la conquete
ot/amalit, fill XIP -premiere moilie du XJ -, s, (Sofia, 1971). See also Cvetana Georgieva,
"Antiosmanskata siiproti\'a na Bu1garite prez XV-XVII v_," ISlorifeski pregled 36, no. 3
(1980: 3-19.
2f Bistra C\'etkO\-a, "Za njakoi formi na suprotiva sreStli turskija feodalen stroj
prez XVIII \'.," in Paisij Clzilendarski i negovata epocha (1762-1962) (Sofia, 1962),
213-51: eadem, "~IoU\-ements antifeodaux dans les terres bulgares sous domination
ottomane du X\,It au XVIII" s.," Etudes histon'qlles 2 (Sofia, 1965): 149-68.
25 ::\"edim FilipO\ic, Pri11e '\fusa i ,S-rih Bedreddin (Sarajevo, 1971).
2') See, typically. Rad()\'an Samard;i.ic, Hqjducke borbe protiv Turaka a XVI I XVII
244 FIKRET ADANIR
approach got the upper hand, especially in the multi-volullll' work
of Aleksandar Matkovski.27 As research on klephts, too, made notahle
progress; at least in academic circles, it was admitted that hl'iducs
and klephts had continued to be active en'lI aner the foulldalioll or
modern national states.:l1!
III
Whether it was a reaction to social injustice, an action prompted by
religious and national motives, or ordinary brigandage, heiducry was
an important military factor in the Balkans and included in all polit-
ical designs against Ottoman rule.:l9 For that reason, among others,
socio-historical characterization of the nineteenth-century uprisings
and revolutions in Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria remains a complex
issue. The uprising of 1804-12 in Serbia, seen by many as the ini-
tiator of national liberation in southeastern Europe, requires perhaps
the most careful analysis. Three different interpretations have evolved:
(1) that the First Serbian Uprising was a bourgeois democratic rev-
olution, (2) that it was a national liberation movement, (3) that it
was merely a peasant uprising in the traditional Ottoman framework
without national goals. From their Marxist standpoint, Yugoslav and
Soviet historians, primarily in the early postwar peI-iod, argued that
the First Uprising was essentially a middle-class movement led by
veku (Belgrade, 1952); Bistra Cvetkova, Chajdutst.:% v biilgarski/e ::.emi pre;;, 15--18 v.
(Sofia, 1971).
27 Aleksandar Matkovski, Turski izvori ;;,a ajdutst·% i aramistv% ,'0 Makedonija, vols.
1-5 (Skopje, 1961-1980); idem, Otporot vo Makedoflija vo vremeto na /urskoto vladeenje, vols.
1-4 (Skopje, 1983). One of the first critics of the heiduc romanticism was Nikola
Sotirovski, "Za opstestveno-ekonomskiot karakter na ajduckoto d\izenje \"0 istorijata
na nasite narodi," Godifnik na Pravniot fakultet va Skopje 9 (1964): 271-80.
28 Bernard Lory, "Problemes du brigandage en Bulgarie 1878-1883," in PUrvi
Mezdunaroden kongres po biilgaristika. Dokladi. Biilgarskata durzava pre::, l'ekovete, \'01. I (Sofia,
1982), 510-15; J. Alexandropoulos, Brigandage and Public Order in /ll( .\lorea, 1685-1806
(Athens, 1985); J. Kolliopoulos, Brigands with II Cause: Brigandagt' and lnedentism in
Modem Greece 1821-1912 (Oxford, 1987), For a critical assessment of the literature
on this problem see Fikret Adamr, "Bemerkungen wm Heiduckenproblem bei Jirecek
und in der modern.en bulgarischen Historiographie," MiUeilullgl'll des Bulgarischen
Forschungsinstituts in Osterreich 3 (1980): 73-95; idem. "Heiduckentum und osmanische
Herrschaft. Sozialgeschichtliche Aspekte der Diskussion urn das friihneuzeitliche
Rauberwesen in Siidosteuropa," Slidost-Forschullgo: 1-1 (1982): 43-116.
29 See Dimitrije Djordjevic and Stephen Fischer-Galati, 17l1! Balkan Rerolutionary
Tradition (New York, 1981), passim.
IIAI,KAN IIIST( )RIOGR..\PHY 245
individuals or rllml IIliddl,,-dass hackground.:{IJ They believed that
the general ('('OIlOllliC' IIpswillg or the eighteenth century had created
a thin stratllnl or \\'C'II-to-do 1ll(,IThants who realized that the Ottoman
system's allliqll"l('d r('laliolls or production hindered the transition
to capitalislll. II \vas asslIlII('d, t hcrc/()re, that the role of the rural
middle class ill Ih" Firsl S"rhiall Uprising was similar to that played
by thc urhall lIIiddle c1ass('s of wcstern Europe in the re\'olutions of
thl' ('igh\(,(,lllh ("(·lIll1ry.11
Since thc I ~17()s there also has heen a new tendency to stress the
national char"('I<'I' or Ill<' Serhian Uprising.:' :! Because there were
practically no hourg'(,ois delllents in Serbia in the early nineteenth
centlll)" thc II(,W argulll<'llt holds, a hourgeois democratic revolution
could hardly h,,\'(, lakcn place, Thus Vladimir Stojance\-ic, the author
of the sectioll Oil lit(' Firsl L'prising in the multi-volume History if
the Serbian Pm/lit' COIHTdes Illcrely that the Uprising functioned as a
bourgeois delllocr"lic rl'\'()lution, ultimately leading to the emergence
of a liberated country with a free peasantry. Warning against con-
fusing causes \\'ith dli.'Cts, hO\\'l'ver, he emphasizes that the creation
of a Serbian slate was the precondition for the emergence of a bour-
geois society, not [lift' ['(,!:I'a,;;
Intensive inquiry into the ideology of the Serbian liberation move-
ment has ensued. \\'as it a national liberation movement from the
start, or as some non-~larxist historians in the West argued, was it
first and foremost a peasant movement in the traditional meaning
of the word? ~lost Serbian nationalist and even Marxist historians
believe that from the outset the insurgents in Serbia had national
30 For example, \'asa CubrilO\ic in the fore\vord he wrote to a ne\,- edition of
Stojan :\"O\·akO\·it'·s J'askrs dr;'am srpske (Belgrade, 1954), 33. See \'.G. Karase\-.
"PerTaja bUrZuazno-nacionarnaja re\'oljucija na Balkanach (k voprosy 0 charaktere
serbskogo \'osstanija 1804-1813 gg.... in }ugosloL'l'Ilske zemge i Rusfja -:a l'reme ?n'ug
srpskog us/allka 1801-1813 (Belgrade. 1983), 401-12.
31 See the introduction by LS. Dostian and v.I. Frejdzon to the \'Olume Fonnirovmll~­
lIaciollal'n"rr/z lIezm'isil1!)'r/z gomdars/l' lIa Balkanadz. KOllfr XVIII-70-e glj(fl XIX D., ed.
I.S. Dostian ~IoscO\,-. 1986', 8-30. here p. II. See further Wayne S. Vucinich.
"Introductory Remarks." in 171f First Serbian Uprisillg 1804-1813, ed. \'-.S. Vucinich
(New York, 1982\. 7.
n See ,\.L. :\"arocnickij, "0 charaktere pervogo serbskogo vosstanija 1804-1813
godo\-' i ego meste \. istorii re\'oljucii konca XVIII i nacala XIX \'eka." ]ugosloDfTlsk,
;;,emy'e I Rusija -:a l'ffll/e Prvog sipskog ustanka 1804-1813 \Belgrade, 1983. 29-48.
33 Istonja srpskog IIm-oda, kn. 5, t. I: Od Proog ustallka do BerlillskoJ!. J.-"I/gresa 1878
(Belgrade. 1981 . 7-95, here p. 92.
24·() FIKRET AI>ANIR
liheration as their political goal.:11 Indeed, scveral proposals for the
creation of a Serhian state all date from the early phase of the
Uprising. In an unsigned "Draft (». the Establishmcnt of a New
Siavo-Scrhiall State" suhmitted in 1804 to Princc Adam Czartol)'ski,
the Russian Foreign Minister, Metropolitan Stc\,an Stratimirovic of
Karlovac appealed (e) I' the restoration of thc mcdicval Scrbian statc. "I:.
Likewise, the insurgents called upon the Austrian governmcnt to help
rcstore the old Serhian state under Austrian protcction, and Sa\'a
Tckd~ja's hetter-known memorandum of 1804 besccched Napolcon
to help thc Serbs establish a Slavic statc called IllYlia, which, undcr
the protcction of France, would arrcst Austrian and Russian cxpan-
sion into thc Balkans.:\(i Thc qucstion of how a pcasant society could
develop a national program is usually answcred by refercncc to a
ncw intelligcntsia cmcrging as a rcsult of increased contact with
Europc. Sincc the lattcr part of the cighteenth century a growing
numbcr of merchants, soldiers, priests and studcnts from Serbian
lands had bccn in contact with the ideas of the Enlightenment, and
during thc Frcnch Rcvolution and thc Napoleonic \Vars, French
armies carried the ideas of liberty and equality to the doorsteps
of thc Southern Slavs. "Finally, there was the systematic propa-
ganda directed from Paris with the aim of undermining Ottoman
authority."37
A third group of authors rejects not only the romantic notion of
the revival of a dormant, indigenous national spiric but also the view,
propounded by Kemal Karpat, among others, that Balkan society had
developed enough internal dynamics to give rise to nationalism in
3-1 See, for example, Miroslav Djordje\'ic, PolitiCke istorija Srbije XIX i XX uka. I:
(1804-1813) (Belgrade, 1956), 6-7.
35 I.S. Dostyan. "Plany osnovaniya sla\-yano-serbskogo gosudarstva s pomoshch .~-u
Rossii v nachale XIX v.," Siaz?yane i Rossi)'a (Moscow, 1972. pp. 98-107.
36 Vucinich, First Serbian Uprising, 5. The memorandum of Tekelija is printed in
Sa\"a Tekelija, Opisanije Zivota Tekelija, ed. Aleksandar ForiskO\ic (Belgrade, 1966,
379-"95.
3; Leften Sta\Tos Stavrianos, The Balkans since 1453 ::\"e\," York, 1958, 211.
Dimitrije Djordje\ic expresses this view in the following fashion: "Les soldats orig-
inaires des regions balkaniques ayant fait du service dans i'annee franc;aise, les com-
merc;ants, les voyageurs, apportaient les \ues de la Re\"olution franc;aise, de li\Tes.
des brochures, et des ecrits revolutionnaires ... Tous ces courants et les evenements
tumultueux europeens de la fin du X\,IIIe siecle donnerem lieu a des projets en
\lIe de la liberation et Ie renouveau de I'Etat serbe." Rh.-olutiolls nationales de peuplts
balkaniques 1804-1914 (Belgrade, 1965), 18.
BALKAN HISTORIOGRARHY 247
,Ill ()ttolllan li·,lI11ework.:m Starting from the premise that early nine-
t('('nth ("('ntllry Serhia was a peasant society that had not yet expe-
ri('n(Td significant social diffcrcntiation, they point out that, especially
dllring Ill<' first stage of thc insurrection (1804-1807), the Serbs were
nol lIlotivated hy the dcsire to establish their own independent national
state. Rather, Ihe Serhs wishcd to subject themselves to the protec-
tion of Ih(' Allstrian, the Frcnch, or the Russian empire. 3Y Their hope
(()J' deliverancc li'om l\1uslim rule was not a novelty in Balkan his-
lory, le)r since the sixtccnth century Balkan Christian leaders had
appealed repeatedly to European powers for support against Otto-
man rule. Their actions cannot be called national liberation move-
ments, however, and thc leaders of the First Serbian Uprising can be
secn as litting into thc same traditional pattern of Christian-lVluslim
conflict. to
IV
The post-war histOliographic treatment of nineteenth-century Bulgarian
liberation has remained similarly controversial. Orthodox l\Iarxist
historians before 1960 saw the small peasantry, along with the work-
ers and artisans in the towns, as the only revolutionary forces within
Bulgarian society. In opposition to these "progressive" factors stood
the stratum of the corbadzii, the well-to-do peasants, tax-farmers, and
moneylendcrs who were the "reactionaries."41 Adherents of this the-
01)' claimed that since about the seventeenth century the Christian
peasantry had been expropriated systematically. On the lands thus
privatized, large agricultural estates called riftliks were established to
be cultivated by enserfed peasants as well as sharecroppers and
38 See Kemal H. Karpat, All Inquiry into the Social Foundations qf Nationalism in the
Ottoman State: From Social Estates to Classes, from Jlillets to Nations (Princeton, 1973).
39 Roger V. Paxton, ";\ationalism and Re\"olution: A Re-Examination of the
Origins of the First Serbian Insurrection 1804-1807," East European OJiarter/y 6 1972):
337-62.
~o For a similar view see La\\Tence P. ~Ieriage, "The First Serbian L"prising
(1804--1813): National Re\i\"al or a Search for Regional Security," Canadian Review
qf Studies in ]vationalism 4 (1977. 187-205.
-II Zak Natan, Biilgarskata l'll ;.ra.'f.dane, (Sofia, 1946), 410-31. On the controversy
over the revolutionary role of the bourgeoisie, cf. also W.-U. Friedrich, "Die bul-
garische Geschichtswissenschaft:' -l23-32.
24B FIKRET ADANIR
farmhands. In turn, "this brought about an exacerbation of the con-
tradictions existing between the peasants and the ruling Moslem class.
The struggle was not only of a class but also of a national charac-
ter, since Christian peasants of the enslaved nationalities were sub-
jected to land expropriation. "12 Critics could easily point out that at
most 7 -B percent of the cultivated lands belonged to the fillliks in
the nineteenth century/I and riftliks had emerged on uncultivated
lands such as the marshy grounds around water mills, sheep ranches,
etc. H Consequently it would be absurd to maintain that land hunger
played a decisive role in the Bulgarian national liberation movement.·I :1
A special focus since the late 1960s on the life of Vasil Levski
reached its climax with the one hundred fiftieth anniversary of the
birth of the "apostle" of Bulgarian liberation in 1987. As a result,
new light was cast on the revolutionary role of the "bourgeoisie."41i
Now it could be established that the supposedly pro-Turkish lorbadl:.i
groups actually had supported the national movement. The ensuing
debates over the participation of the bourgeoisie in the national strug-
gle (as an "active" or "passive force") led to a reevaluation of the
important contributions to the Xational Revival process by Bulgarian
4~ Christo Christov, "The Agrarian Problem and the National Liberation Movements
in the Balkans," in Actes du premier congres international des etudes balkaniques et sud-est
europeennes, vol. 4 (Sofia, 1969\, 66.
43 Strasimir A. Dimitrov, "Ciftliskoto stopanstvo prez 50-70-te godini na XIX
vek," Islorileski pregled 11, no. 2 (1955: 20.
44 Christo Gandev, ;;:pral;dal/e na kapitalistileski otnosenya v CfIlislwto stopanslIJo na severoza-
padna Bulgarija prez XVIII v. (Sofia, 1962. 31-36. For critical analyses of the Bulgarian
literature on this matter, see Fikret Adamr, "Zum Verhaltnis von Agrarstruktur und
nationaler Bewegung in Makedonien 1878-1908," in Der Berliner KongrdJ von 1878.
Die Politik der GrojJmiichte und die Prob/emf der Modemisierung in Siidosteuropa in der zweiten
Hiilfte des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. R. Mehille and H.:J. Schroder (Wiesbaden, 1982),
445-61; idem, "The Macedonian Question: The Socio-Economic Reality and Problems
of Its Historiographic Interpretation," Ink17lational Journal qf Turkish Studies 3 (1984-1985):
43-64; idem, "Tradition and Rural Change in Southeastern Europe During Ottoman
Rule," in the Origins if Backu.·ardness in Eastem Europe, ed. Daniel Chirot (Berkeley-
Los Angeles, 1989), 131-76. Cf. Also Gilles Veinstein, "On the Qiftlik Debate," in
Landholding and Commercial Agriculture in the Jfiddle East, ed. Qaglar Keyder and Faruk
Tabak (Albany, 1991), 35-53.
45 K. Kosev, N. Zecev and D. Dojnoy, Istorya na Aprilslwto viislanie 1876 (Sofia,
1976), 39.
46 Ivan UndzieY, Vasil Levski. Biografi..ia .Sofia, 1967); Nikolaj Gencev, Levski, revolju-
cyala i drugijat szjat (Sofia, 1973); Ivan Cndzie\' and Nikola Kondarev, eds., Sljala i
{isla republika. l:;.brani stranici 01 pismata na Vasil Levski (Sofia, 1987); K. Viizviizova-
Karateodorova, et aI., eds., rasil Ul'ski. Dokummlalen letopis 1837-1873 (Sofia, 1987);
K. Viiz\uzova-KarateodorO\"a. et al.. eds .. Lenki vuv vremeto. Dokumenlalno memoaren i
literaturen sbomik, posveten na 150-godisninata ot roUenieto na Vasil Levski (Sofia, 1987).
"A!."AN IIIS'I'OIUO(;RAPHY 249
diaspora COll1l1lll1lllu's ill BII(·tlJ'('sl, Islanbul and Odessa. The cam-
paign /()r a naliolltll dllll'('h, which ended with the establishment in
Istanbul or
a Bulg'tll'itlll EXtll'dlllle in I B70, and the movement for
Bulgarian natiollal s('hools holh ill Bulgaria proper and, after 1878,
in OUoman Man'dollia alld Thract' would hm-c been unthinkable
without the aClivt' illvol\'('IIH'1I1 0" significant segments of the urban
as well as I'mal lo,.htld~i sll'ala. AI any rate, the intellectual cadres of
the national 1110\'('n\('111 \\,('J'(' O\'('lwhdmingly of bourgeois background.
The new hislol'iographic approach led to a remarkable "rehabili-
tation" or
the nalional hourgcoisic in a country under communist
dictatorship and broughl \\'ilh it a new emphasis on the-since San
Stefano-latent <JUt'sl iOIl 0" /l1l~!!.(//i(/ inn/mla. Heated polemics with
Yugoslav historians 0\'('1' tltt' ('IItnic origin of the ~Iacedonian Slavs47
prepared the ground f(n' a slill l110re dubious political project, the
national assimilation of the 1\ luslim Bulgarians through the so-called
Renaissance Process (l"i.::.roditdt'll Im)(fs) within the Socialist Republic
of Bulgaria.
V
The increasingly nationalistic orientation of the Bulgarian educated
class during the 1970s was state-sponsored. The dosage of national-
ism was regulated by the party, which increased the number of pub-
lications as the thirteen hundredth anniversary of Bulgarian statehood
(1981) neared. Christo Gandev's book on the Bulgmian Nationality in
the Fifteenth Century acquired particular importance in this connec-
tion. 48 The author asserted that every me<.raca in Bulgaria mentioned
in the Ottoman registers signified a former settlement that had
been destroyed by the Ottomans. He calculated that a total of 2,608
"lost villages" amounted to an annihilated Bulgarian population of
560,720 persons and that this signified a demographic collapse~ a ver-
itable genocide. 49 Gandey's thesis did not find undiyided acceptance
4; See Stefan Troebst, Die bll/garisdzjugoslawische Kontroverse /lin .\Iakedonien 1967-1982,
~lunich, 1983).
48 Christo Gandev, Biilgarskata narodnost pre;;. XF /'fl. DemogrrifSko I etnogrrifSko izsled-
rane (Sofia, 1972). Translation into German and other western languages in 1987,
the German title being Das blligarisdze Volk im 15. Jahrlzundert. Demograplzische lind ethno-
graphische Charakteristik (Sofia, 1987).
49 Cf. Bulgm'skala narodnost, 20-56 and passim.
250 FIKRET ADANIR
as CritICS challenged the almost mechanical equation of mezraca with
a deserted village,:'o But other important studies on the demographic
aspects of Bulgarian history seemingly confirmed the political impli-
cations of Gandev's thesis, For example, Nikolaj rrodorov's study on
the Balkan city, which appeared in the same year as Gandev's book,
indicated that the dimensions of Turkish nomadic colonization in
the Balkans were modest and attributed the considerable Muslim
majorities in the cities to widespread conversion.:") I
One of the key issues of Bulgarian history, the question of Islam-
ization during the Ottoman centuries, now came into new focus. Soon
another, much publicized book asserted that, especially during the
seventeenth century, the Bulgarian population had been subjected
to systematic compulsory conversion with the aim of Turkifying the
whole country. 52 Results of additional research appearing in the 1980s
led to further emotionalization of the issue as Cvetana Georgieva,
treating the institution of devjinne, utilized the well-known topos of
"baby snatching" to its full potentiaP3 A most prestigious contribu-
tion to historical demography in this context, however, was the work
of Elena Grozdanova published in 1989, as the political campaign
of changing Muslim names neared its culmination. In this 725 page
study the author concludes that under Ottoman rule Bulgaria dur-
ing the seventeenth century experienced an extraordinary oppression
that resulted in a 33.7 % decrease· in the overall number of Christian
households, chiefly by conversion to Islam. 54 Grozdanova-along with
Petur Petrov and Cvetana Georgieva-belonged to a group of fifteen
historians who came out in the same year (1989) with the mani-
festo-like Pages .from Bulgarian History: An Outline of Islamicized Bulgarians
and the National Renaissance Process. Their thesis was that the culture
of the Islamicized Bulgarians formed an indivisible part of the general
50 For a discussion of this issue, see Fikret Adamr, "Mezra(a: zu einem Problem
der Siedlungs- und Agrargeschichte Stidosteuropas im ausgehenden Mittelalter und
in der Frtihen Neuzeit," in Deutschland und Europa in der Neuzeit. Festschrifl for llarf
Otmar Freiherr von Aretin, vol. 1, ed. Ralph Melville, et al. (Stuttgart, 1988), 193-201.
51 Nikolaj Todorov, Balkanskijat grad, XV-XIX vek (Sofia, 1972), 44-54. English
translation: TIe Balkan Ci9', 1400-1900 (Seattle, 1983).
52 Petiir Petrov, SUdbononsni ~'ekove za bUlgarskata narodnost (Sofia, 1975).
53 Cvetana Georgieva, Ellifarite v Bulgarskile zemi (Sofia, 1988). For an earlier treat-
ment of the subject from Greek point of view, see Basilika D. Papoulia, Urspnl1lg
und WeseT/ der "Kllabenlese" illl Osmanischen Reich (Munich, 1963).
5~ Elena Grozdanova, Biilgarskata narodnost prez XVII vek (Sofia, 1989), 569-86.
IIAI.I\AN IIIST( lRIOGRAPUY 251
Bulgariall ('1111 lin',"'"' (hi III(' basis or such evidence, the Bulgarian
gnvcrJIIlU'III ('ollid illtC'lIsify ils assimilation policies.
VI
In rcccni dl'cadl's Balkall scholarship has produced some superb
works on thl' ()IIIIIII.III pt'l'iod, including Vanco Boskov's and Elizabeth
Zachariadou's silldies on mOllasteries.'It) Zachariadou's later in\'esti-
gation into tilt' COli II 1H'I"ci.\I lillks hct\H~en Venice and the Turkish
principalities of Asia ~Iillor has thro\\'n a new light upon the "Chris-
tian-Islalllic cOldi'olltatioll" ill the eastern l\1editerranean.:i7 Olga Ziro-
jcvic also l'nlarg't'd our kllmdedgc of thc historical geography of the
Balkans signilicantly,·,1\ and l\'laria Todorova's recent research has
opened fresh prospccts to Balkan demographic history.59 Now Anto-
nina Zeljazkm'a's rn'isionist approach to the problem of Islamization
has cast serious doubts on the authenticity of sources utilized in the
nationalist Bulgarian historiography. \ "ith respect to the Rhodopes
region \\·here Islamization reached its peak, for example, she can
provc that "rol1\Trsion to Islam ... was obtained not through direct
coercion and mass campaigns, organized by the sultan, but owing
',5 Christo Christm·. ed .. Sirallici 01 bli(l!,ankala istorija. Oferk .:a isijamiziranile Biilgari
i naciollalllOviz.rodilelllija l}foct's \Sofia, 1989), 82-116.
';6 See Sneiana BuzO\·, "Bibliografia radova Dr. Vance B')5kova," Priloz:.i .:a ori-
jelltalnu jilologiju 34 (1981\: 201-211; Elizabeth A. Zachariadou, "Early Ottoman
Documents of the Prodromos ~Ionastery (Serres)," Sildost-FofS(hungen 28 (1969): 1-12;
eadem, "Ottoman Documents from the Archi\'es of DionysiOll :\Iount Athos) 1195-
1520," Siidost-Forsdlllllgt'll 30 (1971): 1-35 with 14 facs.
57 Elizabeth A. Zachaliadou, Trade and Cmsade: Venetian Crrle and the Emirates qf
MeT/leshe and .1J·din, 1300-].115 (Venice, 1983); eadem, "Holy War in the Aegean dur-
ing the Fourteenth Century," in Latins and Greeks in Ihe Ec.,-Iml Mediterranean -Wer
1204, ed. Benjamin Arbel. Bernard Hamilton and Da\id Jacoby (London, 1989),
212-225.
j8 Olga Zirojevic, Carigradski drum od Beograda do Sofije U59-1683) (Belgrade,
1970); eadem. Carigradsl..-i dmm od Beograda do Budima u XT1 ! XT1I veku (Novi Sad,
1976).
59 Maria Todorova, "Population Structure, ~Iarriage Pattem~. Family and Household
(According to Ottoman Documentary :\Iaterial from North-Ea~tern Bulgaria in the
60s of the 19th Century," Etudes balkaniquesI983/1): 59-~2: eadem, "\Vas there a
Demographic Crisis in the Ottoman Empire in the Sewmeenth Century?" Etudes
balkaniques (198812): 55-63: eadem, "~Iyth-Making in Europecl~1 Family History: The
Zadruga Re\isited," East European Politics and Societies (1990: 30-76; eadem, Balkan
FamilY Slmclure and the European Pattern: Demographic Dn't/oprk';:' in Ottoman Bulgaria
(Washington DC, 1993).
252 FIKRET ADANIR

to economic reasons and the personal choice of the individual, the

family or the whole village."f;t) Vasiles Demetriades' monograph on
Thessaloniki and Evangclia Balta's studies in the field of historical
geography and demography testify to the high level of Ottoman stud-
ies in Greece. fil Certainly it cannot be the purpose of this paper to
present an exhaustive list; Rumanian, Albanian, Croatian, Hungarian
and Russian scholarship have not been treated at all.
Despite all the progress accomplished in the last decades, how-
ever, one overriding trait of conventional Balkan historiography of
the Ottoman period pcrsists: Evcrywhcre thc ccnturics of Ottoman
domination arc conccived as a period of intense rcsistance to the
foreign "occupicr," thus totally dcnying the historical reality of a
common experience shared by the various pcoples in a multi-ethnic
empirc.()'2 Thc implications of this kind of nationalism at thc cnd of
thc twenticth ccntury inevitably leave one in a pessimistic mood.

60 Antonina Zeljazkova, "The Problem of the Authenticity of Some Domestic

Sources on the Islamization of the Rhodopes, Deeply Rooted in Bulgarian Histo-

riography," Etudes balkaniques (1990/-l): 105-11, here p. 109. See also eadem, "Neko-
to rye aspekty rasprostranenija islama na Balkanskom poluostrove \- XV-XVIII vv,"
in Osmanskqja imperija. Sbornik statq, ed. S.D. Oreskova (Moscow, 1986), 103-116:
eadem, Razprostranenie na isijama v zapadnobalkanskite zemi pod osmanska dast, XV-XVIII
vek (Sofia, 1990)_
61 Vasiles Demetriades, Topografia tis thessalonikis kata ten epoche lis Tourkokratias
1430-1912 (Thessaloniki, 1983); E\-angelia Balta, L'Eubee alafin du X1"' siecle. Economie
et population. Les registres de I'amlee J.l74 (Athens, 1989); eadem, "Rural and Urban
Population in the Sancak of Euripos in the Early 16th Century," Archeion EuboikOn
Melewn 29 (1990-1991): 55-185 \\ith 33 pp. Fasc.; eadem, Les vakifs de Serres et de sa
region (XV' el XV/, s.) (Athens, 1995 ..
62 In this regard I fully subscribe to Ylaria Todorova's assessment. See "Bulgarian

Historical Writing," 116-18.