Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija: voenačalnik i dăržavnik
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Bulgarian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Sofija
Iztok-Zapad
2013
|
| Ausgabe: | 1. izd. |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Casimir Ehrnrooth in the history of Bulgaria |
| Beschreibung: | 499 S. Ill. |
| ISBN: | 9786191522606 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV041365731 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20131204 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 131017s2013 a||| |||| 00||| bul d | ||
| 020 | |a 9786191522606 |9 978-619-152-260-6 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)862828383 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV041365731 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a bul | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Cačevski, Venelin |d 1948- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)103648585 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija |b voenačalnik i dăržavnik |c Venelin Cačevski |
| 250 | |a 1. izd. | ||
| 264 | 1 | |a Sofija |b Iztok-Zapad |c 2013 | |
| 300 | |a 499 S. |b Ill. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Casimir Ehrnrooth in the history of Bulgaria | ||
| 600 | 1 | 7 | |a Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir |d 1833-1913 |0 (DE-588)12388375X |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1877-1881 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir |d 1833-1913 |0 (DE-588)12388375X |D p |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1877-1881 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09034 |g 499 |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-026813972 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1806960902373638144 |
|---|---|
| adam_text |
СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ
ВЪВЕДЕНИЕ
.7
L
УЧАСТИЕТО НА К. ЕРНРОТ В ОСВОБОЖДЕНИЕТО
НА БЪЛГАРИЯ ОТ ОСМАНСКО ВЛАДИЧЕСТВО
.13
1.
От Сееста до България: хроника на една бляскава военна кариера
.13
2.
Бойният път
на ген. К. Ернрот по
време
на Руско-турската война през
1877-1878
г
.20
3.
Участието на Трети финландски батальон
в освобождението на България
.39
4.
С
благодарност към
К. Ернрот
.69
II.
С
ДЪРЖАВНИЧЕСКА МИСИЯ В БЪЛГАРИЯ
(1880-1881).77
1.
Назначаването
на К. Ернрот за
военен министър на Княжество България.
.77
2.
Ликвидирането на разбойничеството в Източна и Южна България
.84
3.
Приносът
на К. Ернрот за
развитието на българската армия
.114
Ш.К. ЕРНРОТ
-
ЕДИН ОТ ОСНОВОПОЛОЖНИЦИТЕ
НА БЪЛГАРСКАТА ДИПЛОМАЦИЯ
.163
1.
Статутът
на К. Ернрот в
българското правителство
.163
2.
Участието
на К. Ернрот в
решаването на „железопътния въпрос"
.169
3.
К. Ернрот
и преговорите за правилата на корабоплаване по река Дунав
.194
IV.
РОЛЯТА НА К. ЕРНРОТ ЗА УСТАНОВЯВАНЕТО
НА РЕЖИМА НА ПЪЛНОМОЩИЯТА
.209
1.
Еволюцията на политическата обстановка в Княжество България
.209
2.
К. Ернрот
-
премиер на Княжество България
.255
3.
Преврат или не: какво се е случило на
27
април
1881
г.?
.325
V.
ЗАВИНАГИ СВЪРЗАН
С
БЪЛГАРИЯ
.357
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ
.371
ИНФОРМАЦИОННИ ИЗТОЧНИЦИ
.379
ПРИЛОЖЕНИЯ
.417
РЕЗЮМЕ НА БЪЛГАРСКИ ЕЗИК
.473
РЕЗЮМЕ НА АНГЛИЙСКИ ЕЗИК
.487
СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ НА АНГЛИЙСКИ ЕЗИК
.500
ЗА АВТОРА
.501
CASIMIR EHRNROOTH IN
THE HISTORY
OF BULGARIA
-
MILITARY COMMANDER AND STATESMAN
-
(Summary)
Prosperous are those nations that do not what
they want but what they must do and not when
they wish to do something but when it is required.
Casimir Ehrnrooth
The name of
Casimir
Ehrnrooth is unknown enough or a little
-
known name
for the majority, including educated Bulgarian people. This fact seems sur¬
prising since he participated in the liberation of Bulgaria from Ottoman domina¬
tion in
1878,
and subsequently held senior positions in the government of the
Principality of Bulgaria. During a year and three months
-
from April
1880
till
July
1, 1881,
C. Ehrnrooth was Defense Minister of the Principality of Bulgaria.
He was the fourth consecutive foreigner
-
a senior Russian officer, who has held
this position. For over two months (from
27
April to
1
July
1881)
С
Ehrnrooth
performed the functions of the Prime Minister of the Principality of Bulgaria.
He was the first and one of the two foreigners (the other one is Leonid Sobolev)
who were at the head of the government in the history of Bulgaria. At the same
time C. Ehrnrooth has also performed the functions of the Minister of Interior
and Foreign Affairs.
C. Ehrnrooth is part of the history of Bulgaria. Unfortunately his role, es¬
pecially as a statesman
-
Prime Minister and Minister of Defense is not only
obscure, but presented, in most historical publications, in a false light. The book
aims to show the contribution of C. Ehrnrooth in the liberation of Bulgaria from
Ottoman domination, in the strengthening of the state, in the construction of
the Bulgarian army and in serving the country's interests in relations with the
Ottoman Empire and the other countries. In writing the book original docu¬
ments are used, stored in the archive funds of Bulgaria, Finland and Russia, but
also scientific, memoirs and other publications on C. Ehrnrooth, on the develop¬
ment and foreign policy of Bulgaria in the first years after the restoration of the
Bulgarian state in
1878.
488
Венелин Цачевски ~
Казимир
Ернрот в историята на България
The first chapter of the book is devoted to the participation of General C.
Ehrnrooth in the Russo-Turkish War of
1877 - 1878.
He has traveled hundreds
of miles of hiking and fighting on Bulgarian territory. The commanded by him
Xl-th Infantry Division has been at the forefront of Russian troops who liberated
many villages in northeastern Bulgaria. His name is written in golden letters in
the history of the cities Omortag and Targovishte. During the war, C. Ehrnrooth
demonstrated exceptional skills of warlord evoking admiration for heroism, en¬
durance, moral and human qualities. Besides the respect and love shown to him
by the soldiers of the Xl-th Division, C. Ehrnrooth earned the gratitude and the
gratefulness of thousands of Bulgarians that he was the embodiment of the lib¬
erating mission of Russia.
C. Ehrnrooth, whose military career went fully into the Russian army, fought
as a senior Russian officer. At the same time he was a Finn, as he felt throughout his
life. In the war for the restoration of Bulgarian statehood the Finn C. Ehrnrooth
has been guided by the same objectives as the Russian general C. Ehrnrooth. The
fact he was in the Russian army does not diminish his own contribution as a Finn
in Bulgarian history, as a participant in the liberation of Bulgaria Russo-Turkish
War of
1877 - 1878.
Such have been historical realities. Then Finland has not
existed as an independent state (this happened in
1917)
and has the status of
the Grand Duchy within the Russian Empire. So General C. Ehrnrooth is part of
both Russian and Finnish contribution to the restoration of the Bulgarian state.
At the same time during the war in the Russian army, there was a military
unit
-
Third Finnish rifle battalion composed of Finnish soldiers
-
volunteers. A
particular part of the book is devoted to their war time. In Bulgaria, as well as
in Finland, the Finnish participation in the Russo-Turkish War is identified with
the Finnish battalion, while C. Ehrnrooth is perceived as a Russian commander.
In fact, it is the brightest name of Finn, who was involved in the war. The total
number of Finns who fought in the Russo-Turkish war was about
1,500.
All were
part of the Russian army occupied different positions
-
from ordinary soldiers to
generals and the common among them is that they have passed through severe
trials wounded, and about three hundred of them have given their lives in the
name of the same cause. As a whole, they constitute the Finnish contribution to
the liberation of Bulgaria.
The second chapter of the book is devoted to the activities of the general C.
Ehrnrooth as defense minister. In that capacity, we should mention his contribu¬
tion to the eradication of violence, which was occurring due to the encourage¬
ment and the support of the Ottoman Empire extremists of the Muslim popula¬
tion, and the arbitrariness of the local administration in the eastern and southern
part of the Principality of Bulgaria. It turned into a crisis that became a threat to
the stability, unity and even the state of the country. General
С
Ehrnrooth was
able to find a lasting solution to this problem. He fought not only against
vio-
Summary
489
lence,
but sought to eliminate its causes. For the sake of this purpose, he acted
decisively, but fair and in accordance with the law. It is not true that the indis¬
criminate use of C. Ehrnrooth retaliation was almost the only means which pro¬
vided successful cope with the robbery.
As his enormous contribution may be indicated that he had strongly op¬
posed and did not allow any acts of hostility between Bulgarians and Muslims
grow into ethnic hatred, division and confrontation, which would have serious
consequences for Bulgaria. Therefore what General retaliation has done in the
first few months of his stay in the country can be characterized as one of the most
important accomplishments not only as Defense Minister, but as a Statesman.
With his actions to restore public order and law he won the respect and gratitude
of both Bulgarians
-
Christians and the Bulgarians
-
Muslims in the Principality
of Bulgaria.
As a great achievement of General
С
Ehrnrooth as Defense Minister of the
Principality of Bulgaria could be qualified his military reforms that were of im¬
portance and in some way crucial to the development of the Bulgarian Army. In
fact at that time the creation of the Bulgarian army basically completed, as well
as the formation of the legal framework, the improving of organizational and
command structure and increases its combat capability. This was done under
the direct guidance and the general support of Russia, which is making great ef¬
forts to make the restored Bulgarian state in a strong regional and European ally.
General C. Ehrnrooth played a crucial role in achieving this goal, which was at
the time the historical condition in the strategic interests of the Bulgarian state.
By this time (May
31, 1880).
National Assembly first adopted the mili¬
tary budget, whose share of the Overheads budget of Bulgaria was
41.2%.
The
main objective of
С
Ehrnrooth was to create as fast as possible an army that, in
quantitative terms, with command and organizational structure and weapons
will reliably protect the independence and territorial integrity of the country.
As requested and received increased funding for the needs of the army, he was
trying to create military capabilities that will be required for the achievement
of another priority, which stood in front of the Bulgarian state, namely achiev¬
ing a union of the fractured by the Treaty of Berlin Bulgarian state. General
С
Ehrnrooth understood that if the Principality of Bulgaria does not create a fast
efficient army, achieving this goal would be an impossible task.
As Defense Minister,
С
Ehrnrooth take great care to improve conditions for
the Bulgarian soldiers. He increased significantly daily food rations, improved
supply of the army, sharply reduced unnecessary administrative and other ex¬
penses in the defense ministry and the army and gave a personal example of a
halving of his own salary. He reorganized the structure of the army, created
modern for the time artillery, cavalry and combat engineers, took special care to
provide Navy and for improving border security. At that time was accelerated re-
490
Венелин Цачевски
·**-
Казимир
Ернрот в историята на България
armament
of the army. Priority attention was given to education and training of
Bulgarian military commanders, including into the Russian military academies.
Bulgarian military traditions and symbols have been implemented into the Army.
The rights of the soldiers from different religions, especially Muslims and Jewish
have been recognized. During this period, important laws were adopted in the
military; they were the law of the Volunteer Corps, the law for the acquisition
of the army, including a new version of the soldier's oath, the law of crimes and
punishments in the army and others.
At the end of
1880
and the beginning of
1881
the Bulgarian army and
Volunteer Corps numbered
40-50 000.
Rather, this military potential was used in
the wars after the unification of the Principality of Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia
in September
1885 -
for protection against the aggression of Serbia later that
year in the Balkan War in
1912,
and even in the First World War. In these wars
Bulgarian army achieved impressive military victories under the leadership of
commanders, many of whom had received military training in Bulgaria and
Russia in the period when General C. Ehrnrooth was Defense Minister.
In the third chapter of the book is studied C. Ehrnrooth engaging in the
implementation of foreign policy of the Principality of Bulgaria. During this
period, mainly international negotiations took place to resolve the issue of the
performance of the obligations in the Treaty of Berlin in Bulgaria during the op¬
eration of the railway line Ruse
-
Varna and regulating the conditions for the con¬
struction of new railway infrastructure in Bulgarian territory as part of a kind of
cooperation in this area with neighboring countries. Another problem was called
Danube question which concerns the adoption of common rules of navigation
on the Danube. Serious problems were arising in relations between Bulgaria and
other countries, especially the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary, which in¬
terfere with its internal affairs and tried to discriminate against or forced to act
according to their objectives at various international forums.
In addressing these issues
С
Ehrnrooth, who at that time was not only
military, but for several months Foreign Minister and finally Prime Minister,
played an important role in defending national interests and independence of
the Bulgarian state. Contractual terms of the international conference in Vienna
in June
1881
on „rail issue" was a great success for the young Bulgarian diplo¬
macy. Bulgaria solved in the best possible manner the problem of its external
obligations and participation in future construction of a railway line in the region
with great transportation and economic significance for the country. Bulgaria
was also able to withstand the pressure exerted her to make unacceptable con¬
cessions, related to „Danube question" and prevent deterioration of its relations
with the Great Powers. Bulgarian Government strongly opposed the discrimina¬
tory policy of the Ottoman Empire in Bulgaria. On these issues C. Ehrnrooth
performed as a skilled, determined and pragmatic politician who zealously
de-
Summary
492
fended the interests of the Principality. He can, with good reason, be considered
one of the founders of the Bulgarian diplomacy.
Most attention in the book is devoted to the work of C. Ehrnrooth as Prime
Minister of the Principality of Bulgaria, a position he held from April
27
to July
1, 1881.
Therefore, the fourth chapter is devoted on various aspects of his activ¬
ity. Naturally, more space is occupied by the analysis of events associated with
the establishment of a regime of powers in which
С
Ehrnrooth took an active
part. In Bulgarian historiography, the termination of
27
April
1881
on the au¬
thority of the government of Prime Minister P. Karavelov and the appointment
of a new government by Prince Alexander I Battenberg, which government led
by General C. Ehrnrooth, has been qualified as the first coup after the restoration
of the Bulgarian state.
Regardless of how it would be called, the completed political change was an
important event in Bulgarian history after the liberation from Ottoman domina¬
tion. It was the climax of the conflict between conservative and liberal political
forces on the principles of government. At the heart of these contradictions was
the problem for the powers of the Monarch and other state institutions. When
he took the throne, Prince Alexander I Battenberg clearly showed that he wanted
to change the adopted on
16
April
1879
Tur novo
Constitution, but was forced
to wait for the occurrence of favorable internal and external conditions, mainly
providing support from the Russian Empire to take unilateral action to change
the form of government. His political ally was the Conservative Party and the
main force that opposed his intentions and claims after the elections in early
1880,
was the Liberal Party. Confrontation between the two camps deepened
and developed into conflict in the spring of next year, when the Prince, who ob¬
tained the necessary support from the Russian Emperor Alexander III and from
the other Great Powers and the Ottoman Empire as well, proceeded with the
implementation of his plan.
Tlie
Prince was supported by General C. Ehrnrooth who performed Russia's
policy on this issue, and personally shared the views of Alexander I Battenberg,
that there is a necessity to change the government in which the princely institu¬
tion will have, for some time, virtually unlimited powers.
С
Ehrnrooth became in¬
volved in carrying out the coup, and in his capacity as Prime Minister acted, which
contributed to the landslide victory of the prince supporting Conservative Party
in the elections for a Grand National Assembly held during the June
1881.
The
Assembly approved on July
1
the introduction of the regime of powers. Thanks to
his enormous authority, General
С
Ehrnrooth played a key role in achieving the
stated goal of the Prince. He was convinced that the majority of Bulgarians will
choose the Grand National Assembly members who will support the demands of
the Prince. However, he realized that the situation in the country is unstable and
may get worse if the government did not decisively counter the actions of radical
492
Венелин Цачевски
-*-
Казимир
Ернрот в историята на България
supporters
of the Liberal Party, who strengthened their resistance after the an¬
nounced on
11
May
1881
by the Prince terms, meaning that keeping the Prince
on the throne was depending on their adoption. During this period, General C.
Ehrnrooth undertook extreme measures he believed they were necessary to avoid
internal destabilization. He does not hide his views on the need to amend the consti¬
tution according to the demands of the Prince, but at the same time sought to avoid
violence and confrontation. As in all, his work as the outgoing Defense Minister
and as Prime Minister was guided by the understanding that the decisions should
be in the interest of Bulgaria, and not in favor of one or another political party. C.
Ehrnrooth appointed extraordinary military commissioners
-
Russian officers, in
five separate areas. He also provided them authority to deal with political oppo¬
nents of the Prince and the government, and to the maintenance of internal order.
Extraordinary Commissioners received orders to act without hesitation to dismiss
senior officials who did not obey or opposed the new regime.
For successfully combating resistance to the Prince and the government, as
well as for prevention of fraud and corruption in public administration excep¬
tional military courts were constituted, enunciating only two verdicts- sentences
to death or imprisonment of one month. These actions were mainly preventive.
In fact, General C. Ehrnrooth has not approved any death verdict. The army was
also used to deal with the emerging unrest, which were the most during the first
round of elections for a Grand National Assembly. For smooth operation and to
avoid falsification of the elections, the government of C. Ehrnrooth appointed
sub-commissioners who were under the authority of the extraordinary commis¬
sioners. All actions of the government of C. Ehrnrooth been approved by the
Prince, who has issued relevant guidelines for their implementation.
In addition to the preparation of the elections for a Grand National Assembly,
the Government of the General C. Ehrnrooth has taken measures, including re¬
forms to improve the situation in different areas. Following the appointment of
the new government was announced that a number of laws would be prepared
and adopted, including the law on the establishment of the State Council, leg¬
islation to officials, municipalities, county councils, health case, the police, the
press, forests, road infrastructure, administrative division the country, as well as
criminal and civil laws. Due to the short time during which he was in power, the
government was able to accept only two laws
-
postal and telegraph. At the same
time a tangible progress was achieved in the area of order. Thanks to the ener¬
getic actions of government and the established military administration, public
order and security were greatly improved throughout the country.
Corruption and abuse in state and local government were drastically lim¬
ited. The excessive number of clerks was reduced and there were introduced
criteria for appointment and evaluation of their work The principle of depoliti-
zation of public officials and others was accepted. A number of measures in the
Summary
493
social sphere has been performed, like providing additional funds for helping
poor fighters, construction of hospitals and schools. Reforms in the army con¬
tinued. In the area of the foreign policy, national interests have been successfully
defended, especially the current „rail" and „Danube question" and just in the re¬
lations of Bulgaria with the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary.
All this contributed to the landslide of the Prince and the Conservative
Party in the elections for a Grand National Assembly. Despite the tension and the
riots occurred in some electoral districts, mainly in Pleven and Rahovo, where
elections have not been held, and there has been proclaimed martial law, all of
foreign diplomatic representatives declare elections as legitimate. Election re¬
sults and the subsequent decision of the Grand National Assembly were a very
political victory for the young Bulgarian Prince who achieved his goal
-
to in¬
crease their personal power in the government in the name of his purported
goal of effective and stable government. He realized his intentions because of
the willingness, determination and consistency, especially because of his abil¬
ity to provide the necessary internal and external support the more decisive was
the Russian one. The role of C. Ehrnrooth was irreplaceable. The decision of the
Grand National Assembly was a glorious moment in the political activities of the
General on Bulgarian land.
It was the culmination of what he could achieve as a representative of Russia,
as loyal Minister to the Prince and the last two months, as Prime Minister. On this
date was the end of his stay in Bulgaria. General C. Ehrnrooth had already taken
a final decision on this issue, which was approved by the Russian government.
After the session of the Grand National Assembly, held on luly
1, 1881,
which
approved the terms of the Prince to remain on the throne, C. Ehrnrooth left
Bulgaria and visited the country never more, even as a private person. Through
publications of historians and contemporaries of the events of Bulgaria, it could
be seen the prevailing view that the primary, and even estimated like the only
one reason for the decision of C. Ehrnrooth for leaving Bulgaria at this time was
his unwillingness to participate in the government because he disagreed with or
expected to be involved in unacceptable to repressive regime of powers. Such an
explanation, referring to the decision of General C. Ehrnrooth to leave Bulgaria
as soon as the Grand National Assembly approved the terms of the Prince, is
arbitrary and improvable.
С
Ehrnrooth decision to resign was logical finale of
his persistent efforts to return to Russia as soon as possible, since the conditions
in which he performed his mission was unbearable for him. In fact he took this
decision in the autumn of
1880,
but his attempts to obtain permission from the
Russian government had long failed. General C. Ehrnrooth was correct to his
warrior's duty and loyalty to the Emperor of Russia, as well as to Prince Alexander
I Battenberg, that's the reason why it was unthinkable to leave his post without
authorization. Once at the beginning of May
1881
D. Milyutin informed him
494
Венелин Цачевски
·«*
Казимир Ернрот в
историята
на
България
that the Russian Government did not object more to return to Russia, for general
C. Ehrnrooth the only way was to perform fully his duties as Prime Minister. His
main task was to help the Prince to obtain confirmation by the Grand National
Assembly of stated conditions for a change of government. After implementing
it, he considered his mission to be completed, and there was nothing more to
stop him from leaving Bulgaria.
The participation of C. Ehrnrooth in setting up a mandate (regime of pow¬
ers) in
1881
made him become a controversial figure in Bulgarian history. Almost
all modern historians assess his role as a statesman in terms of assessment that
the same year political change on
27
April was a coup, i.e. unconstitutional and
undemocratic act. This had a decisive influence on the negative attitude to the
overall activity of C. Ehrnrooth in Bulgaria. C. Ehrnrooth himself had a different
assessment of the events in the country at that time
-
his strong belief was that
his actions were not only necessary but also legal ones.
In a letter dated
15
September
1886
on the occasion of the publication
of the magazine „Russian antiquity" and the attached comments of Leonid
Sobolev (who year after the departure of C. Ehrnrooth of Bulgaria was appoint¬
ed Prime Minister) where the political change in
1881
was characterized as a
coup, the general wrote the following: „The form of government composed by the
Legislators of Turnovo (the general meant the Constituent Assembly, which was
adopted constitution of the Principality of Bulgaria) has been slightly adapted to
Bulgaria, I thought so in
1881,
I think so now. You (L. Sobolev) do not seem to
share this belief
-
we will not argue. I do not understand why you feel as an illegal
one the act of July
1, 1881;
in my eyes Svishtov Grand (National) Assembly was
a body which expressed the will of the people, at least as true and legally as the
Constituent Assembly in Turnovo".
Is it the assessment of General C. Ehrnrooth that the regime of powers was
lawful, reasonable, meaning it was not in violation of the Constitution of the
Principality of Bulgaria?
The answer to this question should be placed in the context of the events at
that time in Bulgaria, started with the proclamation of the Prince, the dismissal
of the current and the appointment of a new government on
27
April
1881,
the
subsequent actions of the Council of Ministers for the maintenance of the public
order, the announcement on
11
May of the conditions of the Prince, depending
on whose adoption he would remain on the throne, scheduling elections for a
Grand National Assembly, the manner in which the elections were held on
14
and
21
June and finally adopted on July
1
of that year by the Grand National
Assembly of the act, through which was established the regime of powers.
According to the Turnovo Constitution, the executive power belonged to
the Prince, and all the authorities of this government acted on his behalf and
under his supreme supervision (Article
12),
Ministers were appointed and
dis-
Summary
495
missed by the Prince
(152),
and one of them, chosen by the Prince, should be
appointed Chairman of the Council of Ministers (Article
149).
This means that
the Prince had a constitutional right to terminate the powers of the govern¬
ment, when he finds it appropriate. He took advantage of this right in November
1879,
when fired the entire staff of the Council of Ministers and appointed a
new government. The Prince did the same thing in March
1880,
when entrusted
Dragan Tsankov
to form a new government. So the decision of the Prince of
27
April
1881
to terminate the authority of the Government of Prime Minister P.
Karavelov and to appoint a new Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister
Gen. C. Ehrnrooth was the third consecutive change of government. It was in
accordance with the rights, given to the Prince by the Constitution.
Therefore, the widespread evaluation in Bulgarian and Russian historiogra¬
phy that decision that Prince Alexander Battenberg I took on this issue was un¬
constitutional, and even less that it was an act of the coup, is obviously incorrect.
On the other hand, reasons for which the Prince announced the appointment of
the new government should be taken into account. They were contained in the
proclamation which he announced the same day. In fact the new government
was appointed to prepare the elections for a Grand National Assembly, the aim
of which should be the adoption or rejection of the terms of the Prince, which he
announced on
11
May
1881
and, depending on whose implementation he would
stay or leave the throne.
As a result, an emergency situation occurred in the country, such as in the
Constitution was not envisaged that might occur and therefore no legal meas¬
ures had been specified to address to this situation for its overcoming. The
Constitution contained rules relating to a change or a review of Basic Law. It was
the responsibility of the Grand National Assembly to be convened for this pur¬
pose. On
11
May
1881
the Prince set conditions that relate to the expansion of its
powers and the creation of new government buildings, but he didn't want to be
undertaken a partial or a complete revision of the constitution. He appealed that
his will concerning his competences, would be provided with a provisional pe¬
riod of seven years. After the expiry of this period, the Grand National Assembly,
based on the evaluation of their applications and gain experience, could eventu¬
ally accept them as constitutional amendments.
Resolving the case was complicated due to the commitment of the Prince
of the solution to this question by keeping his throne, i.e. if the Grand National
Assembly approved his demands, he will continue to implement princely pow¬
ers, but otherwise will abdicate. A situation, in which the reigning Monarch has
decided himself to give up the throne, and this without a legitimate heir, also was
not provided for in the current constitution. Nor was constitutionally regulated
also the question of whether and on what basis the Prince could be removed from
the current position. The monarchy was defined as hereditary, and in the author-
496
Венелин Цачевски -~
Казимир
Ернрот в историята на България
ity of the Grand National Assembly was included the election of a new Prince, if
the incumbent has died and left no heir. If the heir to the throne is a minor, the
Grand National Assembly must elect regents. Arrangements for addressing this
issue have been specifically set out in Chapter Six of the Constitution.
Although the unusual situation occurred after
27
April
1881
in Bulgaria,
the outcome of which was not regulated in the Constitution, it could be consid¬
ered that the decision of the Prince to schedule elections for a Grand National
Assembly to decide on the request for introduction of temporary changes in
government was founded. The practical implementation of this measure, how¬
ever, required to follow certain constitutional procedure for the convening of the
Grand National Assembly to approve or reject the terms of the Prince. In this
respect, the main contentious issue is whether the Prince had a constitutional
right to convene the Grand National Assembly on its own initiative, without any
approval by the motion in the National Assembly. According to Article
140
of the
Turnovo Constitution Grand National Assembly shall be convened by the Prince
or the Regency or Council of Ministers. And under Article
141,
second para¬
graph, only the Prince had the right to convene the Grand National Assembly to
amend or review the Constitution. „The decision of meant items required major¬
ity vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly." Under Article
167
of the
Constitution of the Principality of Bulgaria amendment or review of the consti¬
tution becomes „the same way, which is ordered to issue laws
(cf.
Art.
108
and
109)."
These two articles are included in Chapter
XVI
of the Constitution, which
had regulated the issue of the order they are imported and considered projects
and proposals to the National Assembly.
Under Article
108
of the Turnovo Constitution legislative initiative belongs
to the Prince and the National Assembly, and according to Article
109
bills and
government proposals are submitted to the National Assembly by the relevant
ministers in the princely order. Later this chapter cover issues relating to the im¬
ported by the government bills and proposals. Once adopted by the National
Assembly „by majority vote," they should be presented to the Prince who is to de¬
cide, i.e. to approve or not during the session of the National Assembly. Articles
105, 106
and
107,
which are in Chapter XV of the Turnovo Constitution, which
lists the „what works has to return the National Assembly", not on the question of
the proposals that the Prince could possibly make for an amendment or revision
of the Constitution.
The Constitution does not contain an explicit statement to determine the
order in which the Prince must submit their proposals for possible changes to
the Constitution. This means that there was ambiguity or place for different in¬
terpretations of whether the proposal of the Prince for a constitutional amend¬
ment must be approved by the Ordinary National Assembly based on the pro¬
cedure for payment of bills to the government and then be discussed and voted
Summary
497
on in the Grand National Assembly or this can be done by direct submission
to the Grand National Assembly without the approval of two-thirds majority in
National Assembly. Moreover, in this case the question was not to change the
Constitution, which, although formally, was remaining in force. In the manifesto
issued by the Prince after the meeting held on
1
July
1881
session of the Grand
National Assembly, he declared again that the current Constitution will remain
in the future basis of public law in the country.
On this occasion should be given the position of the Russian government
adopted in March
1881
on the request of the Prince to increase his power in the
government of Bulgaria. The proposed action plan was developed so that its per¬
formance could not be seen as an unconstitutional act, but as a legal act that didn't
violate the Constitution. One of the main elements of this plan was the decision
of the Council of Ministers, under which the Grand National Assembly will not
change, i.e. will maintain the Turnovo Constitution. In its entirety, the plan was
in line with Russia's traditional position that the actions of the Prince to change
the government have to be legitimate, i.e. to comply with the requirements of
the Constitution. Generally, the same was the position of the major European
countries and the Ottoman Empire, who did not appreciate the Prince's actions
as a coup, so, except England, who chose not to act openly, all of them supported
the Prince proclamation on April
27,1881
and subsequent decision of the Grand
National Assembly to establish a system of powers.
Therefore, the arguments that the political change in
1881
wasacoup, i.e. un¬
constitutional and undemocratic act based on questionable interpretation of the
Constitution. My personal opinion on this is that Prince Alexander I Battenberg
was not constitutionally obliged to obtain the approval of the National Assembly,
before submitting his proposal for emergency powers in the Grand National
Assembly.
Another major criticism to General
С
Ehrnrooth's involvement in making
political changes in Bulgaria in
1881
was that during the period of the led current
government, a military regime was in fact established, as well as the elections for
a Grand National Assembly had been manipulated and conducted in the context
of violence against the Liberal Party, which had a decisive influence on the elec¬
tion results, which have been ensured victory for the Prince and for his political
supporters. Was that really so?
Actually, there was no organized and widespread opposition to the actions
of the Prince and the government. There were meetings and rallies supporters
of the Liberal Party against the actions of the Prince, but an active part of their
performance took a relatively small number of people. Such were the findings
of his contemporaries who were unable to be declared to maintain the Prince.
According to P. Matveev, a small part of the Bulgarian people actively partic¬
ipated in the rallies
-
somewhere between one hundred and five hundred. A.
498
Венелин Цачевски
-*
Казимир Ернрот в
историята
на
България
Mosolov,
who accompanied the Prince, wrote that during his election tour of the
country attempts by supporters of the opposition parties to make speeches have
been very rare, but even such ones were there, at the first words, the crowd did
not let them. „My platoon, he wrote, had to rescue dissidents by beating their fel¬
low citizens, which was
a non
easy task." Zahari Stoyanov wrote as well: „Liberal
at the time meant something criminal; it was akin to what I say? With the word
for rebel
-
„komita"
in Ottoman times. One who knew he was known for liberal,
was hardly calm when passed in the crowded streets
.
Criminals from
1
July
(as Zahari Stoyanov was called all those among them the Prince and General C.
Ehrnrooth who committed political change in
1881)
told a crowd of ignorance,
so that it wondered stupidly: How could have been tolerated before all those
dangerous people liberals?
Although there may have been falsifying of reports in some sections during
the elections for a Grand National Assembly, generally the abuses
v
/ere not more
than they have been in the previous elections in
1880,
the outcome of the elec¬
tions reflected the existing currently correlation of forces between the two politi¬
cal camps. In fact, the Bulgarians have chosen not so much between the then two
major political forces
-
the Conservative and the Liberal Party, as between the
Prince and the Liberal Party. For Prince Alexander I Battenberg, who enjoyed a
great public popularity and relied on the unconditional support of Russia, it was
not difficult to achieve his objective. So the power measures of the Government
of General C. Ehrnrooth facilitated and supported the electoral victory of the
Prince, but have not be the decisive reason for it. Indicative in this respect is the
finding of S. Radev, who, in describing the situation in Bulgaria after the proc¬
lamation of the Prince, especially before and during the elections for a Grand
National Assembly has not spared criticism towards the actions of the govern¬
ment and especially C. Ehrnrooth actions taken to intimidation, repression and
made even physical abuse by the supporters of the Liberal Party, including some
of its leaders. „Would the Prince get a majority for his coup, S. Radev rhetorically
asked, if he hadn't used violence?" And gave the following response, which is dif¬
ferent from that of liberals who categorically respond
-
no!" Truth is ascertained
by Radev that if there was complete freedom, the result would be quite different.
But that victory would be on the side of the liberals, it can not be claimed.
„
No matter how criticised is the role of General C. Ehrnrooth in setting up
a mandate in
1881,
though Bulgarian historians admit, though partial and con¬
ditional, have recognized his merits as Minister of Defence and to suppress the
violence in eastern and southern Bulgaria in
1880.
They also have emphasized
its positive moral and human qualities. S. Radev described him as „an honest
man" who „let himself respected." In his monograph „Bulgarian Chronicles" St.
Tzanev described him as „clever" and critical to the regime of powers. According
to T. Vasilyov, who as a district chief in a troubled regions in Bulgaria in
1880,
and
Summary
499
after April
27,1881
as Secretary of the Ministry of Interior had direct experience
of his work, characterized C. Ehrnrooth as „smart, capable, honest"; a contem¬
porary of the events P. Matveev is emphasizing on its integrity and A. Golovin,
equerry to the Prince, and A. Koch, palatial pastor devoted whole pages in their
memoirs, describing his professional and human qualities.
Honest, intelligent, educated, capable, respectable, a man of principle in his
relations with people, rigorous, but caring and fair to his subordinates and with
respect for the Constitution and the State institutions. That was written for C.
Ehrnrooth even by those who believed that the established by the General re¬
gime was „unconstitutional", „undemocratic" and even „dictatorial". Was there
another one similar case of recognition of the statesman in such circumstances
and moreover when it comes to a foreigner in Bulgarian history?
It seems to me that the most accurate summary evaluation of C. Ehrnrooth
elating to its activities in Bulgaria has made S. Stolberi. „The activities of General
C. Ehrnrooth" she wrote, „is little known, but he is one of those people who
have made history." I will add that in his activity as Bulgarian statesman he was
guided by the understanding that nations who do not do what they want, but
what they must do and do not do anything when they like, but when it's required,
would prosper. Unfortunately, both in Bulgaria and in Finland, he has not re¬
ceived proper recognition for his contributions. This is probably due to the fact
that C. Ehrnrooth has not been involved in large and memorable events in his
homeland. Undoubtedly „Russian factor" has also significant influence, namely
that C. Ehrnrooth was serving in the Army and later in the civil service of Russia,
but not of Finland.
No one can choose at what time to be born. Choosing between Finland and
Russia was no a matter of alternatives over C. Ehrnrooth and his contemporar¬
ies. When it came time to make such a choice, he did not hesitate to show his
patriotism in a way that few people in his place would have it so. At the risk of
being accused of partiality, I believe that C. Ehrnrooth is a remarkable son of the
Finnish people, so to his dignity can be manifested only courtesy and respect.
Finland should be proud of C. Ehrnrooth as every nation and every country
would be proud of such a person. A very unique phenomenon is that a Finn was
Prime Minister and Minister of Defense of another, furthermore an European
country, with a rich history and culture, such as Bulgaria. C. Ehrnrooth belongs
to Finland, but he is also part of the history of Bulgaria, and of Russia as well.
Therefore the name of
С
Ehrnrooth has been and always will be one of the his¬
torical characters in the relationship not only between Bulgaria and Finland, but
also among the three countries.
The book is dedicated to the 180th anniversary of
Casimir Ehrnrooth's
birth.
2013
marks also the centenary of his death. |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Cačevski, Venelin 1948- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)103648585 |
| author_facet | Cačevski, Venelin 1948- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Cačevski, Venelin 1948- |
| author_variant | v c vc |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV041365731 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)862828383 (DE-599)BVBBV041365731 |
| edition | 1. izd. |
| era | Geschichte 1877-1881 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1877-1881 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nam a2200000 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV041365731</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20131204</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">131017s2013 a||| |||| 00||| bul d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9786191522606</subfield><subfield code="9">978-619-152-260-6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)862828383</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV041365731</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">bul</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cačevski, Venelin</subfield><subfield code="d">1948-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)103648585</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija</subfield><subfield code="b">voenačalnik i dăržavnik</subfield><subfield code="c">Venelin Cačevski</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="250" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1. izd.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Sofija</subfield><subfield code="b">Iztok-Zapad</subfield><subfield code="c">2013</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">499 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Casimir Ehrnrooth in the history of Bulgaria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="600" ind1="1" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir</subfield><subfield code="d">1833-1913</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)12388375X</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1877-1881</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir</subfield><subfield code="d">1833-1913</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)12388375X</subfield><subfield code="D">p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1877-1881</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09034</subfield><subfield code="g">499</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-026813972</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Bulgarien |
| id | DE-604.BV041365731 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-08-10T01:10:02Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9786191522606 |
| language | Bulgarian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-026813972 |
| oclc_num | 862828383 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 499 S. Ill. |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| publishDateSearch | 2013 |
| publishDateSort | 2013 |
| publisher | Iztok-Zapad |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Cačevski, Venelin 1948- Verfasser (DE-588)103648585 aut Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik Venelin Cačevski 1. izd. Sofija Iztok-Zapad 2013 499 S. Ill. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Casimir Ehrnrooth in the history of Bulgaria Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir 1833-1913 (DE-588)12388375X gnd rswk-swf Geschichte 1877-1881 gnd rswk-swf Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd rswk-swf Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd rswk-swf Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir 1833-1913 (DE-588)12388375X p Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 g Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 s Geschichte 1877-1881 z DE-604 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Cačevski, Venelin 1948- Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir 1833-1913 (DE-588)12388375X gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)12388375X (DE-588)4046514-7 (DE-588)4008866-2 |
| title | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik |
| title_auth | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik |
| title_exact_search | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik |
| title_full | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik Venelin Cačevski |
| title_fullStr | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik Venelin Cačevski |
| title_full_unstemmed | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija voenačalnik i dăržavnik Venelin Cačevski |
| title_short | Kazimir Ernrot v istorijata na Bălgarija |
| title_sort | kazimir ernrot v istorijata na balgarija voenacalnik i darzavnik |
| title_sub | voenačalnik i dăržavnik |
| topic | Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir 1833-1913 (DE-588)12388375X gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd |
| topic_facet | Ehrnrooth, Johan Casimir 1833-1913 Politik Bulgarien |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=026813972&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cacevskivenelin kazimirernrotvistorijatanabalgarijavoenacalnikidarzavnik |