 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Treaty of San Stefano" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(April 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 The signing of the treaty of San Stefano | |
| Type | Bilateral treaty |
|---|---|
| Signed | 3 March 1878 (1878-03-03) |
| Location | San Stefano,Ottoman Empire |
| Original signatories | |
The 1878Preliminary Treaty of San Stefano (Russian:Сан-Стефанский мир; Peace of San-Stefano,Сан-Стефанский мирный договор; Peace treaty of San-Stefano,Turkish:Ayastefanos Muahedesi orAyastefanos Antlaşması) was a treaty between theRussian andOttoman empires at the conclusion of theRusso-Turkish War of 1877–1878. It was signed atSan Stefano, then a village west ofConstantinople (present-day Istanbul), on 3 March [O.S. 19 February] 1878 by CountNicholas Pavlovich Ignatiev andAleksandr Nelidov on behalf of the Russian Empire and by Foreign MinisterSaffet Pasha and Ambassador toGermanySadullah Pasha on behalf of the Ottoman Empire.[1][2][3]
According to the official Russian position, by signing the treaty, Russia had never intended anything more than a temporary rough draft, so as to enable a final settlement with the other Great Powers.[4][5]
The treaty provided for the establishment of an autonomousPrincipality of Bulgaria following almost 500 years of Ottoman rule in the Bulgarian lands. Bulgarians celebrate the day the treaty was signed, 3 March [O.S. 19 February] 1878, asLiberation Day. However, the enlarged Bulgaria envisioned by the treaty alarmed neighboring states as well as France and the United Kingdom. As a result, the enlargement was never implemented, being superseded by theTreaty of Berlin following theCongress of the same name that took place three months later.[3]
-byTodorBozhinov.png)
The treaty established the autonomous self-governingPrincipality of Bulgaria, with a Christian government and the right to keep an army.[6] Though stillde jure tributary to the Ottomans, the Principalityde facto functioned as an independent nation. Its territory included the plain between theDanube and the Balkan mountain range (Stara Planina), the region ofSofia,Pirot andVranje in theMorava valley, NorthernThrace, parts ofEastern Thrace and nearly all ofMacedonia (Article 6).
Bulgaria would thus have had direct access to theMediterranean. This carried the potential ofRussian ships eventually using Bulgarian Mediterranean ports as naval bases, which the other Great Powers greatly disliked.
A prince elected by the people, approved by the Ottoman Empire, and recognized by theGreat Powers was to take the helm of the country (Article 7). A council of Bulgarian noblemen was to draft a constitution (also Article 7). (They produced theTarnovo Constitution.) Ottoman troops were to withdraw from Bulgaria, while Russian troops would remain for two more years (Article 8).
According to Philip Roeder, the Treaty of San Stefano "transformed" Bulgarian nationalism, turning it from a disunited movement into a united one.[7]
Under the treaty,Montenegro more than doubled its territory, acquiring formerly Ottoman-controlled areas including the cities ofNikšić,Podgorica, andBar (Article 1), and the Ottoman Empire recognized its independence (Article 2).
Serbia gained the cities ofNiš andLeskovac inMoravian Serbia and became independent (Article 3).
Turkey recognized the independence ofRomania (Article 5) while the latter gainedNorthern Dobruja from Russia (to which it was transferred from the Ottoman Empire) and cededSouthern Bessarabia in a forced exchange.
In exchange forwar reparations, theSublime Porte cededArmenian andGeorgian territories in theCaucasus to Russia, includingArdahan,Artvin,Batum,Kars,Olti,Beyazit, andAlashkert. Additionally, it ceded Northern Dobruja, which Russia handed to Romania in exchange for Southern Bessarabia (Article 19).
Article 21 allowed the population living in areas conquered by Russia to sell property and immigrate to Turkey. The Treaty of Berlin kept a similar provision. ManyAdjarians leftAdjara at this time.[8]
TheVilayet of Bosnia (Bosnia and Herzegovina) was supposed to become an autonomous province (Article 14[9]).Crete,Epirus andThessaly were to receive a limited form of local self-government (Article 15[9]), while the Ottomans vouched for their earlier-given promises to handle reforms in Armenia in order to protect the Armenians from abuse (Article 16[9]). The Straits—theBosporus and theDardanelles—were declared open to all neutral ships in war and peacetime (Article 24).
TheCircassians of the newly liberated Balkan territories, who had been settled there in 1864 following theCircassian genocide and had committed several atrocities against the Christian population of the region during the war, were to be expelled. This way, theCircassian minority in Dobruja disappeared.[10]
The Great Powers, especially British Prime MinisterBenjamin Disraeli, were unhappy with this extension of Russian power, and Serbia feared that the establishment ofGreater Bulgaria would harm its interests in the former and remaining Ottoman territories. These reasons prompted the Great Powers to obtain a revision of the treaty at theCongress of Berlin, and substitute it with theTreaty of Berlin.
Romania, which had contributed significantly to the Russian victory in the war, was extremely disappointed by the treaty, and the Romanian public perceived some of its stipulations as Russia breaking the Russo-Romanian pre-war treaties that guaranteed the integrity of Romanian territory.
Austria-Hungary was disappointed with the treaty as it failed to expand its influence in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
TheAlbanians, dwelling in provinces controlled by the Ottoman Empire, objected to what they considered a significant loss of their territory to Serbia, Bulgaria, and Montenegro and realized they would have to organize nationally to attract the assistance of foreign powers seeking to neutralize Russia's influence in the region. The implications of the treaty led to the formation of theLeague of Prizren.[11]
In the "Salisbury Circular" of 1 April 1878, the British Foreign SecretaryRobert Cecil, made clear his and his government's objections to the Treaty of San Stefano and the favorable position in which it left Russia.
According to British historianA. J. P. Taylor, writing in 1954:
"If the treaty of San Stefano had been maintained, both the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary might have survived to the present day. The British, except forBeaconsfield [Disraeli] in his wilder moments, had expected less and were therefore less disappointed. Salisbury wrote at the end of 1878 'We shall set up a rickety sort of Turkish rule again south of the Balkans. But it is a mere respite. There is no vitality left in them.'"[12]
Since 1990, a number of historians, publicists and journalists in Bulgaria have subjected the Treaty of San Stefano and the entire policy of theRussian Empire on theEastern question in the 19th century to critical re-evaluation.[13][14] They argue that the liberation of theBulgarians was used only as a stepping stone for the subjugation of "Turkish Slavs" and an eventual claim toConstantinople.[13]
The circumstances leading to the signing of the Treaty of San Stefano are depicted inBoris Akunin's historical novelThe Turkish Gambit. Akunin in general sticks to known historical facts, though he attributes some acts to fictional characters such as his recurrent protaginistErast Fandorin.
Treaties of San Stefano and Berlin.
In the preliminary treaty of peace Russia had taken no account of the opinion of Europe. [...] The problem for the Powers was to persuade Russia in the moment of victory to submit her contract with Turkey to a resettlement from the point of view of the general interest.
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
