THE SPACE OF THE BULGARIAN STATEHOOD OVER THE CENTURIES – TRADITIONS, SUCCESSION AND PRESENT AGE

The earliest cultural layers here date back to 4000 years ago and are related to one of the ancient Indo-European tribes – the Thracians[1]. With few exceptions, the Thracians were politically fragmented, inhabiting large part of the Balkan Peninsula in close contact with Hellenes, Illyrians and Dacians.  They had a unique culture and a specific language, but they did not create their own writing which made them highly vulnerable to foreign influences.

The second most significant and chronologically important civilizational factor in the development of the Balkans was the diffuse spatial invasion of the Slavs. During their movement from north to south in the 4th-6th centuries, they reached as far as the islands of the modern Greek state. This led to a gradual cultural-linguistic assimilation of the majority of the ancient Balkan population, with the exception of the Hellenes and the Illyrians (in today’s Albania).

For the dynamic alterations of the Balkan peoples’ political map in the time period from 4th c. BC to 7th c. AD the ancient Macedonian statehood, the Roman Empire and its eastern geopolitical successor – Byzantium were of the greatest importance. The borders of their Balkan dominions were repeatedly subjected to nomadic raids, especially during the 4th-7th centuries – Goths, Huns, Vandals, Avars, Bulgarians and many others. Among them the ancient Bulgarians, also known as Proto-Bulgarians, were of the greatest importance for the Balkan history.

The Proto-Bulgarians are tribes which gradually formed their ethno-cultural identity during the first centuries of the New Age by conquering large areas in the inner continental regions of Asia – between Western Siberia, Altai, the Tarim Basin, Turan, Iran and the Caucasus. The question of their genetic affiliation is controversial. There are various hypotheses of Turanian (Turkic), Altaic (Hunnic), Iranian (Aryan) and mixed origin. The significance of the Proto-Bulgarian trace in the History of Eurasia is emphasized in the works of a number distinguished researchers such as Runciman (1930), Toynbee (1934, 1939), Gumilev (1989, 1990, 1993), Davies (1996, 2006). For example, in his book “A History of the First Bulgarian Empire” Runciman (1930, p. 4) writes: “The Huns and their tempestuous onrush over Europe made a story that has often been told... Not long ago a wave of militarism swept over Europe, and an awful ancestry became the boast of every bellicose nation; Attila[2] was proudly called cousin, if not grandfather, by them all. Of all these claims, it seems that the Bulgars’ is the best justified…”. However, in our opinion, to this statement should be added the fact that today the name „Attila” is one of the typical names in Hungary while in Bulgaria it is found mainly among the representatives of the Turkish ethnic community. By their movement westwards of the Ural border of Europe the Proto-Bulgarians founded several state formations (Fig. 1) . Most famous among them are Old Great Bulgaria of Khan Kubrat (7th century), Volga Bulgaria (7th-13th centuries) and Danube Bulgaria (7th-21st centuries, but with two big interruptions of the statehood during the 11th-12th and 15th-19th centuries).

After the collapse of Old Great Bulgaria some of its tribes headed southwest to the Danube Delta and Northern Dobruja. They were led by one of the Khan Kubrat’s sons – Asparukh. After a successful war with Byzantium he founded a state in the Lower Danube Plain by entering into an alliance with the local Slavic tribes. This was recognized by a treaty concluded in 681 with the Byzantine Emperor Constantine IV Pogonatus. For a long time this First Bulgarian Kingdom had significant possessions not only to the south but also to the north of the Danube River, including the Carpathian Mountains as well. Initially its capital was Pliska (7th-9th centuries), and then – Preslav (9th-10th centuries).

Figure 1. Slavs and Proto-Bulgarian (6th-7th centuries)

In 865, Knyaz Boris (852-89) introduced the Christianity as an official religion in Bulgaria. At his will some of the disciples of the Holy Brothers Cyril and Methodius created powerful cultural centres in Pliska, Preslav, Ohrid and in some other settlements. From there a new script began to spread which became known as Church Slavonic or Old Bulgarian[3]. Intensive training of priests began, church books were translated and transcribed, and the first painting and literary works of Bulgarian authors were created. Churches and fortified settlements were built. The work of Boris was continued by his son Simeon (893-927)[4]. Under him and his successor Petar (927-69) the new Christian cultural achievements of Bulgaria began to spread over a large part of the lands in Eastern Europe.

In the 9th-15th centuries the Bulgarian language and script were gradually becoming liturgical for the Orthodox peoples and countries in Eastern Europe – a kind of analogue of the Latin language in the western part of the continent. The new intellectual elite of Bulgaria had a significant influence on the spread of the Orthodox religion and culture in the Balkans, the Carpathians, and the Eastern European Plain[5].

By the end of the First Millennium the Bulgarian state weakened. Heresies contesting the secular and the ecclesiastical authority appeared, among them the most famous was Bogomilism[6]. The Bulgarian kings, aristocracy, army and clergy began to lose wars, territories and social influence.

After a protracted confrontation and with a fluctuating success in 1018 Byzantium was able to subjugate all Bulgarian lands and to break the already established nearly 340-year-old state tradition. The last decisive battle of resistance against the Empire was fought by Tsar Samuil whose main fortress was Ohrid (today’s North Macedonia). Some contemporary North Macedonian authors and politicians try to dispute his belonging to the medieval Bulgarian political tradition but the historical facts are unequivocal – after defeating the Bulgarian army the Byzantine Emperor ordered the captured soldiers to be blinded and became known in the History with the nickname Basil II Bulgar-Slayer (Βουλγαροκτόνος).

The Second Bulgarian Kingdom emerged after nearly 170 years of Byzantine rule. It was the result of the uprising of the brothers Petar and Asen (1185) who set in a new dynastic tradition with capital Tarnovgrad. The conquest of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade and the founding of the so-called Latin Empire (1204-61) led to a noticeable increase of the significance of the new Bulgarian capital for the Eastern Orthodoxy. This is the reason why many in these times called Tarnovgrad “Third Rome”[7].

During the reign of Ivan Asen II the Bulgarian Kingdom reached its largest territorial expansion – according to various estimates between 350 and 400 thousand km². On this ground even today can often be heard in the country the widely popular expression of historical pride and geopolitical code – “Bulgaria on Three Seas” (Fig. 2).

The Second Bulgarian Kingdom ceased its approximately 210-year-long existence with the Ottoman invasion on the Balkans by the end of the 14th century. Almost five centuries “separateness” from Europe and its cultural and economic achievements followed for the Bulgarian lands. Danger of assimilation of the Bulgarian ethnicity, its Slavic language, original script and Christian values arose.

In spite of the severe trials during the Ottoman Islamic rule at the end of the 18th century the Bulgarians began to become gradually awoken. Churches were rebuilt, schools were opened, books were printed, and with a sultanic firman in 1870 an independent Bulgarian Orthodox Church (Bulgarian Exarchate – Fig. 3-A) was re-established. An annual celebration of the Holy Brothers Cyril and Methodius and of the by them created Slavic script began. The cultural and economic rise of the Bulgarians within the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century became known as the “Bulgarian Revival”. Immediately before the Liberation in 1878 the Bulgarian lands were distinguished by a relatively favourable socio-economic potential within the Ottoman Empire but there was a significant lag behind the development of the countries from Western and Middle Europe (Table 1).

Figure 2. Bulgaria under Tsar Ivan Asen II (1241)

Table 1. Socio-economic potential of the Bulgarian lands in 1870 (in the modern state borders of the Republic of Bulgaria)

 Calculated by Maddison, 2003 (s. 96, 98, 156, 256, 259)

In the 19th century, the Bulgarians more and more showed armed resistance to the Ottoman rule. The April Uprising of 1876 became a cause for another war of Russia against the Sublime Porte. One of the war results was the foundation of the Third Bulgarian State in 1878. Decades of dynamic territorial alterations followed (Fig. 3 – B, C, D). The state borders were stabilized just after the World War II.

Figure 3. The Bulgarian Exarchate and the Changes of the Bulgarian Political Borders (19th-20th Cent.)

А – The Bulgarian Exarchate (1870)

B – Bulgaria according to the Treaty of San Stefano (March 1878)

C – Principality of Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia according to the Treaty of Berlin (July 1878)

D – Bulgaria between the World War I and the World War II

Bulgaria reappears on the political map of Europe and the Balkans after a long period of interrupted state tradition. For a century and a half, its statehood has been developing in dynamic conditions. The structure of government underwent profound transformations - from a constitutional monarchy through a totalitarian socialist state to a democratic parliamentary republic. Today, it develops through a complex interaction between civil society, non-governmental organizations, political parties and national institutions. IIt is distinguished by a single two-tier administrative-territorial division, but over time it has been subjected to dynamic changes associated with sharply changing impacts of various external and internal factors. However, despite this, there is also a relatively good degree of continuity in governance at the regional and local levels.

For almost 5 centuries before the Liberation (1878), the Bulgarian lands were part of the Ottoman Empire. In the 16th-17th centuries, they were the basis of its Balkan possessions.

The medieval Ottoman Empire was a typical absolute monarchy. It was inhabited by dozens of peoples practising some of the world's most widespread religions. Among the main pillars of political power in it is the religious doctrine of Islam. Domestic social relations followed the so-called "millet system" distinguishing the sultan's subjects into orthodox Muslims and infidels. Formally, the communities of infidels (Judaism, Orthodox, Catholics, etc.) have religious rights and certain forms of autonomy, but on the condition that they accept the supremacy of the Islamic state. In practice, however, this declarative parity is too often violated by representatives of local levels of government.

Already in the process of the conquest of the Balkan Peninsula in the 14th-15th centuries, the new territories of the empire were organized into 8 sanjaks[8]  - Chirmen, Pasha (Thrace and the Rhodope Mountains), Sofia, Kyustendil (the upper reaches of the Struma River and the fence mountains), Ohrid (parts of present-day northern Macedonia and Albania), Vidin, Nikopol, and Silistra (the Danube Plain) (Gradeva 1993). Their boundaries largely covered the gradually conquered statehoods such as the Despotate of Velbazhd (now Kyustendil), Vidin and Tarnovo kingdoms (Nikov 1930; Georgieva and Genchev 1999). The Sanjaks were united into two large provinces (beylerbeits) - Anatolia (in Asia Minor) and Rumelia (in Southeast Europe).

The administrative structure of the empire in the mid-19th century was implemented through territorial units of different hierarchical rank - vilayet (Fig. 4), sanjak, kaaza, nahia, karye (later  - Chiflik). Their frequent rearrangement was related to the use of natural, historical or conjuncturally defined criteria for their configuration and names. In the middle of the 19th century the Bulgarian lands fell mainly into several Ottoman vilayets - Danubian, Adrianople, Thessaloniki, Kosovo, Monastir and Sofia Sanjak (after 1864 - part of the Danubian vilayet).

Figure 4. Ottoman Vilayets in the Balkans and Sofia sanjak (1860s)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on Palairet 1997; Magocsi et al. 1993.

The representative of the Sultan and supreme head of the administration in the Vilayet is the Valiya. The vilayets are divided into sanjaks. The Danubian Vilayet, for example, included Tulcea, Varna, Ruschuk (now Ruse), Tarnovo, Vidin, Nis (until 1869) and Sofia (until 1876), while the Adrianople Vilayet included Filibe (now Plovdiv) and Islimie (now Sliven), Edirne, Gallipoli and Tekirdağ.

The Sanjaks are governed by the Mutesarif, the Kazas by the Kaymakam, and the Nahiyes by the Mudir. Their activities are supported by local councils of elders (majlises).

For the Bulgarian lands, the Bulgarian Exarchate (see Fig. 3–A) and the boundaries between its different dioceses began to play an important role after 1870. These largely determined the first outlines of the administrative units of Bulgaria after the Liberation.

A reformist attempt to modernize social relations in the empire were legislative initiatives in the first half of the 19th century known as "Tanzimat" (reorganization). Of greatest importance among these were the Gulhan khatisherif (1839) and the Khatikhumayun (1856), which were strongly influenced by the socio-economic upsurge in the countries of Western Europe. In practice, the reforms undertaken began to gradually erode the foundations of the millet system and the stability of the Ottoman state. This is particularly noticeable in its Balkan possessions, where the diffuse penetration of European economic, social and political innovations is most evident.

The cultural, political and socio-economic development of the Bulgarian lands in the first half of the 19th century is known as the Bulgarian National Revival. During this period a wealthy class of farmers, craftsmen and merchants emerged. Conditions were created for a cultural upsurge through the strengthening of cultural centres (Fig. 5). Churches were rebuilt, schools and community centres built. Literature in the Bulgarian language was disseminated. Many young people were educated abroad and progressive ideas were spread. This created the conditions for a unified literary and spoken language, national consciousness and aspirations for independence. An essential stimulus for this was the successful liberation movements in neighbouring countries.

Figure 5. Main Centres of Intellectual and Revolutionary activity in the Bulgarian Lands during the Bulgarian National Revival

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from Zaimov, 1898; Todorova, 2009 and several maps from Atlas on the … 1990;

The Bulgarian aspiration for freedom manifests itself in various forms. In the 1860s and 1870s Bulgarian emigrants established a few resistance centres abroad. In 1869-1872. Vasil Levski managed to build a hierarchical network of internal revolutionary committees (Fig. 5).

Several significant uprisings break out - 1835, 1841, 1850, 1856, 1875, 1876. With the greatest resonance was the brutally suppressed April Uprising in 1876. During his preliminary preparation, part of the Bulgarian lands were divided into 4 revolutionary districts. Thus, one of the first ideas for a regional division of the Bulgarian lands was proclaimed by the leaders of the national liberation movement.

Bulgarian statehood was restored as a result of the Russo-Ottoman War (1877-1878) and the decisions of the Treaty of Berlin (1878). The first basic law of the new state was the Tarnovo Constitution adopted in 1879 (Fig. 6). Many of its principles are like analogous documents adopted earlier in neighbouring Greece, Serbia and Romania. However, a few progressive ideas advocated by the leaders of the Bulgarian Revival were also reflected in it, making it one of the most liberal constitutions of its time in Europe. A key factor in this was the traditions of pre-liberation landed gentry unions, structurally and organisationally built on democratic principles - e.g., policies and decisions based on majority (Hadzhiyski, 1997).

Figure 6. The convening of the Grand National Assembly in Veliko Tarnovo (April 1879)

Source:  Bigstock Photos

The Tarnovo Constitution guaranteed relative parity between monarchical, parliamentary and executive powers (Fig. 7). That parity has been repeatedly violated, but generally remains legally guaranteed. The liberalism of the Tarnovo Constitution is expressed more in humanitarian and abstract terms – it provides for common rights and freedoms but does not strictly regulate the relations between the various institutions and organs of power, grants the monarch the right to dissolve and convene the National Assembly, does not regulate precisely as time and term periodic elections. This creates the possibility of misunderstandings, clashes and abuses from the side of the three expressors and participants in the exercise of state power, especially in critical situations (Pantev, 1994).

Figure 7. Speech of Tsar Boris III to deputies and ministers in the National Assembly of Bulgaria (1932)

Source:  Bigstock Photos

The Tarnovo Constitution concentrates all popular sovereignty in the National Assembly. Assuming legislative, constituent and control functions, the National Assembly becomes one of the most important state institutions, which has the ability to determine to a large extent the directions of state development. The social balancing that had already taken place in the Revival, as well as the progress made in the economic and educational spheres, created confidence that Bulgaria was able to adapt and incorporate the European models of democracy of the time in their final completed form and function relatively quickly. Despite the optimal separation of powers, the place and role of the Bulgarian parliament in the state system are often contested. Examples in this respect include the political interference during the so-called "regime of powers"[9], the personal regimes of Tsar Ferdinand and Tsar Boris III, authoritarian organizations such as the Military Union, the People's (Democratic) Union, Zveno, and communist totalitarianism after 1944.

In its functioning, the National Assembly has dynamically changing positions among state institutions. In certain periods it dominates the political system, in others it was practically subordinate to the monarch through the executive power he has elected. The accumulated parliamentary experience in the constant struggles between the different institutions, in the creation of a legal basis for Bulgarian statehood, is an important element in the consolidation of democratic traditions in Bulgaria.

In 1915, Bulgaria joined the First World War on the side of the Triple Alliance. In 1918, however, it capitulated and was forced to sign the Treaty of Paris (1919) with harsh clauses. This had a huge impact on the political situation in the country in the following decades.

In 1919-1944, the social dynamics in Bulgaria were highly dependent on the influence of three main political factors - the monarchical institution, the military and the left political organizations. After World War I, the liberal democratic principles of the political process were severely compromised (Grancharov, 1993). The two successive national catastrophes set the stage for the growing influence of extreme authoritarian ideologies, strongly influenced by foreign policy trends in Europe and Russia. Both in Europe and at home, voters made clear their disappointment with traditional bourgeois parties. At the same time, Bulgaria demonstrated its own original contribution to the development of authoritarianism, adapted to specific national socio-economic conditions. Unlike in many other European countries, the democratic instincts of society in Bulgaria have largely managed to preserve a rational minimum that prevents it from going to totalitarian extremes.

The monarchical regime of government imposed by Tsar Boris III in 1936-1943 gave the executive much greater power in the social and political life of the country. The Council of Ministers gradually became primarily responsible to the king, and the National Assembly found itself in a subordinate position. Under such domestic political conditions, in March 1941, Bulgaria joined the Tripartite Pact. In December – symbolically declares war on the USA and Great Britain. However, Bulgarian troops were not sent to the Eastern Front. Moreover, with the patronage of Tsar Boris III, a large group of deputies and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, the deportation of the Bulgarian Jews to the concentration camps of Hitler's Germany was prevented.

With the support of Moscow, dozens of partisan units and militant terrorist groups were created to sabotage the government and terrorize its representatives. To counteract them, the government created special gendarmerie units and, in individual actions, drew in a significant part of the regular army.

On September 5, 1944, the USSR declared war on Bulgaria. An invasion by the Red Army followed, creating the conditions for a puppet coup, bloodlessly carried out by patriotic tsarist officers and communists loyal to Moscow. Power was temporarily taken over by the so-called Fatherland Front, which began repressions against representatives of the old government. The left terror was continued by the so-called "People's Court" against the background of similar trials of war criminals in several European countries. More than 4,500 people were sentenced to death and life imprisonment. Around 1,500 people are missing or killed without trial or conviction. Much of the country's pre-war intellectual elite was repressed and excluded from participation in key public positions, and the vacuum created was filled by loyal supporters of the new communist government.

The first administrative territorial units after the Liberation largely resembled the inherited Ottoman and Church division. The orographic features of the territory also have a significant impact. Subsequently, the importance of industrialization, geodemographic processes, the development of settlement, production and transport infrastructure, changes in the territorial scope of Bulgaria increased. This necessitates frequent changes in the type, hierarchy and boundaries between its administrative-territorial units.

After the Treaty of Berlin (13 July 1878) the provisional Russian administration of the Principality of Bulgaria divided its territory into 5 provinces (Sofia, Vidin, Tarnovo, Ruse and Varna), comprising 33 districts. The Tarnovo Constitution defines the division into districts, counties and municipalities. On this basis, in 1880 the governorates were abolished, the districts were reduced to 21 and included 58 counties. A new division was made in 1882 (Fig. 8).

At the same time, the autonomous region of Eastern Rumelia adopted as its basic law the so-called "Organic Statute", which defined 6 counties (Fig. 8) and 28 districts as basic administrative units (Statelova, 1983).

Figure 8. Administrative-territorial division in Principality of Bulgaria and the autonomous Ottoman province of Eastern Rumelia (1881/82-1885)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on Preliminary results of …, 1881 and Annual statistics …, 1885.

By the beginning of the 20th century the territorially expanded Bulgaria was divided into 23 districts, including 84 counties (Fig. 9). Subsequent military conflicts on the continent led to dynamic changes in both the state boundaries and the number and scope of some of the country's administrative units. For example, the areas of Gorna Dzhumaya (now Blagoevgrad) and Kardzhali were permanently incorporated into Bulgaria after 1919, and between the two world wars Silistra and Dobrich (southern Dobruja) became part of Romania.

Figure 9. Administrative-territorial division in Bulgaria (1885-1901)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from Dŭrzhaven …, 1887 and List of …, 1902.

In 1934-1940, Bulgaria was divided into 7 districts (Fig. 10), comprising 83 counties with 1,212 municipalities (Kopralev Y. et al (eds.), 2002), and this scheme was briefly interrupted in 1935.

During the wars in the first half of the 20th century, some other neighbouring territories from Greece and the former Yugoslavia were briefly annexed to Bulgaria and temporarily became part of its administrative division.

Figure 10. Administrative-territorial division in Bulgaria (1934-1940)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from Dŭrzhaven …, 1934 and Statistical yearbook …, 1935.

The period 1945-1949 was characterised by the consolidation of the power of  the communist government of the Fatherland Front through the system of so-called "people's democracy". A controlled multi-party system functioned briefly, but gradually non-communist parties were eliminated. Only one political organisation (Bulgarian Agricultural People's Union) was maintained in a state of formal and in a position of strong subordination to the communists. The National Assembly was dissolved. Government is carried out by ordinances. The education requirement for civil servants was abolished. The leadership of the army and the police was completely replaced. Under these conditions, a referendum on republican government was held (1946) and a constitution on the soviet model was adopted (1947)[10].

The highest organ of state power until 1971 was the Presidium of the National Assembly, whose chairman served as head of state. After 1971, the Presidium was replaced by a permanent State Council, which took over the functions of the National Assembly. People's representatives meet only a few times a year, practically following the will of the State Council.

In the second half of the twentieth century, the administrative division of the territory of Bulgaria continued to undergo changes related to dynamic socio-economic processes. During socialism, the country underwent a powerful industrialisation based on resource- and energy-intensive soviet technologies with relatively low economic efficiency. Private property of land was abolished, agriculture was centralised and mechanised. Cities grew rapidly at the expense of a huge rural population influx.

The specificity of the above-mentioned profound socio-economic changes necessitates the implementation of several reforms related to the administrative-territorial structure of the country. The priority of the socialist state became the frequent planned remodelling of internal economic proportions through subjectively imposed administrative boundaries (Roussev, 2005). An argued critique in this respect is found in a study by Kolev (2002). According to him, this type of abrupt changes has a negative impact on the efficiency of state governance.

In 1949, the seven administrative districts (see Fig. 10) were abolished, and in their place 15 (later 13) districts were successively created as units of the highest rank. Counties played a secondary role, their number remaining at 102, but the number of municipalities increased to 2,178. In 1959, one of the most far-reaching territorial reforms was carried out: the three-tier system was replaced by a two-tier system, represented by 30 districts (subsequently reduced to 28) and a frequently changing number of municipalities (between 979 and 1389). This led to the disruption of stable relationships and irreversible destructive changes in the functions of many settlements. At the same time, the importance of county towns is increasing, and a new type of settlement support structure is being built for the purposes of economic growth (Nedkov, 2014). Thus some important peripheral settlements, such as Silistra, Kardzhali, Smolyan, Blagoevgrad, Kyustendil, etc., are being strengthened.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the administrative-territorial structure of Bulgaria stabilized, with 28 regions (now provinces) (Fig. 11). In 1979, municipalities were briefly amalgamated into nearly 300 subdivisions called "village systems". In 1981, they functioned again as municipalities. Reducing their number through clustering was a new attempt to increase managerial efficiency. The aim was to territorially identify economic entities (e.g., agrarian-industrial complex[11] and worker-producer cooperative[12]) with administrative boundaries, which in practice mainly supports the smaller municipalities in terms of potential. Their analogue after 1989 are municipal companies. In 1987 the districts were grouped into 9 administrative provinces (Fig. 12) and 273 municipalities (24 municipalities are on the territory of the town of Sofia) (Kopralev et al, 2002). After 1998 the old division was reverted with minor changes (Nedkov, 2014).

Figure 11. Administrative-territorial division in Bulgaria (1961-1987)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from National Statistical Institute

Figure 12. Administrative-territorial division in Bulgaria (1987-1998)

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from National Statistical Institute

In 1991, the Seventh Grand National Assembly adopted a new Constitution. According to it, Bulgaria is a republic with parliamentary government. The head of state is the president, who is directly elected by universal suffrage every 5 years. However, his legislative and administrative powers are substantially limited. He is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and appoints the diplomatic representatives of the State. He has the power to return laws passed by the National Assembly once for further consideration and re-voting. The President appoints 1/3 of the judges of the Constitutional Court, the President of the Supreme Court of Cassation, the President of the Supreme Administrative Court and the Prosecutor General. Despite his very limited powers, the president is called upon to play a certain balancing role between the highest state institutions in the country. His role increases in the case of upcoming elections to the National Assembly, when he appoints a temporary caretaker government.

The unicameral parliament (National Assembly) is the permanent supreme legislative body. The number of deputies is 240 and they are elected every 4 years directly by popular vote. In cases where matters of exceptional importance for the country need to be decided (for example, the adoption of a new constitution), it is possible to convene a Grand National Assembly. It consists of 400 deputies and its mandate ends when the issues on which it was convened are exhausted.

The supreme executive organ of state power is the Council of Ministers /government/. It is headed by a Prime Minister who proposes a programme of government and the composition of the government for approval by the National Assembly. The executive is controlled by the National Assembly and is responsible for the domestic and foreign policy of the state.

The judiciary is represented by various higher courts – Constitutional Court, Administrative Court, Court of Cassation. The Supreme Judicial Council, the Prosecutor's Office, the district, military and appellate courts play an important role in maintaining the rule of law.

In recent years, the need for constitutional changes to optimize the balance between state institutions has become an increasingly important topic of discussion for Bulgarian society.

Modern Bulgaria is a unitary state. Its current administrative division consists of 28 administrative districts and 265 municipalities (Fig. 13). According to the standards of the European Union, their rank is respectively - NUTS[13] 3 and LAU[14]. The capital and the next two largest cities are divided into municipal districts. In Sofia they are 24 in number, in Plovdiv – 6 districts and Varna – 5 districts.

The regional governor is appointed by the government to coordinate state policy with local interests and exercise administrative control. Political crises and the alternation of governments with short management mandates are sometimes associated with the frequent replacement of regional governors, which reduces the effectiveness of the functioning of this intermediate administrative territorial level. A typical example of this is the period after April 2021, when there are five early parliamentary elections and only one regular and multiple ex-officio ministerial councils are governed.

The mayors of municipalities and the composition of municipal councils are elected every 4 years. Municipalities (as well as small settlements) solve specific independent priority local tasks. They are legal entities with their own budget. Unlike regions, municipalities can own property through which they can develop economic activity.

Mayor's districts are part of the territory of municipalities and usually encompass 1 or 2 small villages with adjoining territories. Their mayors are elected if the residents are more than 100, but if there are fewer – the mayor of the municipality appoints a deputy mayor[15].

Municipal development policies are determined by municipal councils, and executive power is exercised by mayors of municipalities and mayor's districts.

The largest by area among the districts in Bulgaria (fig. 13) is Burgas (6.9% of the country's territory), and the smallest - Sofia (1.2%). The absolute demographic leader is the capital (19.1% of the population), and the last place is the Vidin region (only 1.1%). Almost 1/4 of the municipalities have a population of less than 5000 people. For example, only about 350 people live in municipality of Trekljano (Kyustendil district).

Figure 13. The modern borders of Bulgarian municipalities and provinces in Bulgaria and demographic potential of their administrative centres

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on data from National Statistical Institute

The last general reform of the administrative division and management of the country was in 1998. However, the transition to democratic development and market economy has been accompanied by a severe demographic crisis and dynamic socio-economic transformations – privatisation and restitution, the bankruptcy of dozens of super-large socialist enterprises, the land consolidation, the restructuring of industry, a sharp increase in the importance of the tertiary sector. One of their obvious consequences is the formation of new spatial balances which led to the fast weakening of the potential of some regions and an increase in the others. This requires a revision of the existing administrative territorial hierarchy and optimization of its possibilities to be used for conducting an effective regional policy. The accession of Bulgaria to the Euro-Atlantic structures in 2004-2007 and the necessity of a new type of spatial adaptation to the contemporary continental policies are also powerful incentives for this. Challenges also lie in several inherited subjective decisions to draw administrative boundaries (Fig. 14).

Figure 14. Administrative centres and borders between the regions of Ruse, Razgrad and Targovishte

The modern organization of the Bulgarian state is a complex result of the influence of several factors - Ottoman heritage, national ideals, Great Powers, diffuse development of continental and global socio-economic processes. In a relatively short time after Liberation, the country experienced several periods of sharp changes in the political model of development. However, there are also certain vectors of continuity in the state system in terms of adaptation to the dynamic challenges of the modern era. This applies both to the central bodies of political power and to the structural administrative-territorial aspects of governance. At the beginning of the 21st century, overcoming the crisis processes related to the socio-economic transition and the aspiration to continental integration acquired a primary role.

Notes:

References:

Annual statistics of Eastern Rumelia for 1883. Plovdiv, 1985. (in Bulgarian and French)

Atlas on the history of Bulgaria for secondary schools (1990). Sofia, 1990. (in Bulgarian)

Davies, I.,  Europe: A History. Oxford, 1996.

Davies, I.,  Europe East and West: A collection of essays on European history. London, 2006.

Dŭrzhaven vestnik, Vol. 55, 23.05.1887. (in Bulgarian)

Dŭrzhaven vestnik, Vol. 38, 19.05.1934. (in Bulgarian)

Georgieva, Ts,, N. Genchev, History of Bulgaria XV-XIX centuries. Volume II, Sofia, 1999. (in Bulgarian)

Gradeva, R., Administrative system and provincial government in the Bulgarian lands in the 15th century. – In: The Bulgarian fifteenth century. Sofia, 1993.(in Bulgarian)

Gruncharov, S., Bulgarian society after the First World War. Management of the Bulgarian Agricultural Union. – In: History of Bulgaria. Sofia, 1993. (in Bulgarian)

Gumilev, L., Ethnogenesis and the Earth's biosphere. Leningrad, 1989. (in Russian)

Gumilev, L., Geography of ethnos in the historical period. Leningrad, 1990. (in Russian)

Gumilev, L., Rhythms of Eurasia. Moscow, 1993. (in Russian)

Hadzhiyski, Iv., Optimistic theory for our people, Sofia, 1997. (in Bulgarian)

Kolev, B., Problems of the classification of administrative-territorial units and territorial units in Republic of Bulgaria. – In: Alternatives for Bulgaria, Sofia, 2002. (in Bulgarian)

Kopralev, Y., et al (eds.) Geography of Bulgaria: physical and socio-economic geography, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Sofia, 2002. (in Bulgarian)

Kumanov, M., Political parties, organizations and movements in Bulgaria and their leaders 1879-1949. Sofia, 1991. (in Bulgarian)

List of settlements in the Principality of Bulgaria according to the census of December 31, 1900. Sofia, 1902. (in Bulgarian)

Magocsi, P., G. Matthews et al. History atlas of East Central Europe. Seattle and London, 1993.

Nedkov, R., Administrative territorial structure of Bulgaria: problems, changes, opportunities for optimization. – In: Veliko Tarnovo, 30th Anniversary of the Department of Geography. 2014. (in Bulgarian)

Nikov, P., The fate of North-Western Bulgarian lands in the Middle Ages. Sofia, 1930.  (in Bulgarian)

Palairet, M., The Balkan economies c. 1800-1914: evolution without development. – Cambridge studies in modern economic history, 6. Cambridge, 1997.

Palangurski, M., State–political system of Bulgaria 1879-1919. Veliko Tarnovo, 1995. (in Bulgarian)

Pantev, A., The Great Beginning of the little principality. – In: History of Bulgaria, Sofia, 1994. (in Bulgarian)

Preliminary results of the census of the population of January Statistical Bureau. Sofia, 1881. (in Bulgarian and French)

Roussev, M., Ranging and typologization of the districts and municipalities in Bulgaria in terms of the sustainable development. Annual of Sofia University “St. Kl. Ohridski”, Book 2 – Geography, 97, 2005.  (in Bulgarian)

Runciman, J., A history of the First Bulgarian Empire, London, 1930.

Statelova, E., Eastern Rumelia (1879/1885). Economy, politics, culture. Sofia, 1983. (in Bulgarian)

Statistical yearbook of the Kingdom of Bulgaria. General Directorate of Statistics, 1935. (in Bulgarian and French)

Todorova, M., The living archive of Vasil Levski and the creating a national hero. Sofia, 2009. (in Bulgarian)

Toynbee, A., A Study of History. Vol I, Introduction: The Geneses of Civilizations, Oxford, 1934.

Toynbee, A., A Study of History. Vol IV, The Breakdowns of Civilizations, Oxford, 1939.

Zaimov, S., The Past: Essays and memories of the activities of the Bulgarian Secret Revolutionary Committees from 1869-1877, Plovdiv, 1898.  (in Bulgarian)

www.nsi.bg

*Sofia University „St. Kliment Ohridski“

[1] It is believed that Plovdiv was founded even earlier. Its age is estimated at about 6 thousand years - approximately the same age as Athens. Thus, they are among the ten oldest cities in the world that have been preserved to this day.

[2] Attila (406-53) is the most famous ruler of the Huns in the History. Under his rule they succeeded to conquer territories between the Caucasus, the Alps, the Baltic and the Black Sea. They became known among the local peoples as strong and merciless horse tribes. At the time of Attila part of the Hunnic tribal union were also the Proto-Bulgarians.

[3] The “Old Bulgarian language” is actually the “first literary Slavic language”.

[4] The reign of Simeon has become known in the History as a “Golden Age” of the Bulgarian state. In a broader temporal sense this term refers also to the reign periods under his father Boris and his son Petar.

[5] Among the arguments that can be used to present the leading role of Bulgaria in the Middles Ages stand out:

• Ioan I (966-1035), born in Bulgaria. In 1018, he was ordained as the third Metropolitan of Kiev and of all Russia.
• Cyprian (1330-1406), a representative of the Tarnovo Literary School. In 1375, he was ordained Metropolitan of Kiev and Lithuania, and after 1390 – of all Russia. In 1472, he was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church as a saint and a miracle worker.
• Grigoriy Tsamblak (1365-1420), a disciple of Evtimiy of Tarnovo (the last Bulgarian Patriarch before the Ottoman invasion on the Balkans). In 1401-06, he was a Presbyter of the Great Church of Moldavia and Wallachia in Suceava (today’s Romania). He wrote the first literary works on Moldavian themes and imposed the Bulgarian language as a literary one in the lands of modern Romania. In 1413, he was ordained Metropolitan of Lithuania, and in 1415 – Metropolitan of Kiev and of Lithuania.
• Constantine of Kostenets (1380-1431), a follower of the Tarnovo Literary School. He contributed to the formation of the written and literary tradition in Serbia where he was called Constantine the Philosopher and “Father of the Serbian Historiography“.
• In some time periods after the 9th century, a number of metropolises, archbishoprics and eparchies in the modern lands of Serbia, Romania, Moldova and Ukraine were under the hierarchical leadership of Bulgarian Orthodox Church Centers such as Drustar (today’s Silistra), Ohrid, Tarnovgrad and others.
• The Church Slavonic (Old Bulgarian) literary language was main language of the worship service and the official correspondence in Wallachia and Moldavia for several centuries – so long as until their unification in 1861 into a common Romanian state.

[6] Bogomilism was a religious sect that influenced the development of the Christianity significantly. It appeared in Bulgaria during the 10th century and by the 16th-17th centuries was spreading and developing around many European lands (then called Bosnia, Lombardy, Languedoc, Navarre and others). Its representatives became known as Cathars, Albigensians, Bugars, etc.

[7] Much later - in the 15th-16th centuries, Russian monks and historians began to refer to Moscow as such.

[8] Translated, "sanjak" means "flag". This is the name given to troops fighting under the banner of a single bey. The sanjak played the role of the most operational administrative territorial unit in the Ottoman state.

[9] Between July 1881 and December 1883 Knyaz Alexander Battenberg suspended the Constitution adopted in 1879 and ruled by decrees.

[10] In 1971, a new Constitution of the People's Republic of Bulgaria was adopted, reflecting the evolution in the ideological foundations of the socialist stateness.

[11] The agro-industrial complex is a territorial grouping of production activities based on agricultural production and their technological continuation mainly in the sectors of light and food industry within a certain municipality.

[12] The worker-producer cooperative under socialism was a small-scale production enterprise, whose management was mainly the responsibility of municipal and village authorities. The main highlights of its production list are tailoring and footwear, leather processing, metals, plastics, etc.

[13] Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics

[14] Local Administrative Unit

[15] According to the official statistics, at the end of 2022, the number of the settlements in Bulgaria with less than 100 residents per permanent address is 1849 (out of 5237). In total, only about 1 % of the country’s population lives in them.