THE INTERNAL REVOLUTIONARY ORGANIZATION’S NEW SITUATION

THE INTERNAL REVOLUTIONARY ORGANIZATION’S NEW SITUATION

The failed Ilinden Uprising put the Macedonian Revolutionary Organization in a particularly difficult position. The loss of a large number of its personnel during the Uprising, as well as the atrocities committed against the rebel villages by the Ottoman army and bashibozuks, left the Revolutionary Organization limp. One of the first concerns the Organization’s leaders, who still remained on the ground after the Uprising ended, was to reconnect with the organizational ranks. This was absolutely necessary, especially in the areas of the Bitola Revolutionary District where the uprising was strongly expressed. In all other revolutionary districts, the state of the Organization was quite different, it remained almost unaffected.

There is no doubt that the failed Ilinden Uprising raised many ideological and tactical questions which the Revolutionary Organization had to address and find appropriate answers. Fundamental issues, such as lessons learned from the Ilinden Uprising and in general from the long-standing revolutionary activities, democratization and decentralization in the ranks of the Revolutionary Organization, etc., became the subject of debate at all congresses held by the Organization during 1904 - 1905. In general, until the Rila Congress, held in October 1905, the Revolutionary Organization experienced a steady rise in its ranks. Important organizational issues were dealt with at the district congresses, which were held during 1904 -1905, as well as at the Rila Congress, which served as the general congress for the Organization. However, after the Rila General Congress, which covered various ideological and tactical views, a fracture began to appear in the Organization. As a consequence the Internal Organization began to experience constant intrusion and open division, from which, in time, two opposing views began to crystallize. As a consequence, resistance began to develop within the leadership that impacted not only the Organization’s leadership but also the Macedonian National Liberation Movement in general. The physical fighting was very harmful and reflected in the further growth of the Revolutionary Organization. Two currents called “left” and “right” began to emerge in the Organization. These currents, later formed into separate groups and organizations with established ideological bases. In fact, they were not based on economic and social assumptions but primarily on a national and tactical nature. From this we can conclude that a more appropriate term to describe “the right” would be the term pro-Bulgarian. As a consequence of this division in the Revolutionary Organization, especially after the Rila Congress, there was mutual confrontation. Armed detachments were formed which supported one or the other side. All this dealt a great blow to the Revolutionary Organization and left extremely severe consequences for the Revolutionary Movement in Macedonia. In such a mutual struggle and division, both of the revolutionary cadres and the combat elements, many faithful workers and experienced fighters lost their lives in the long struggles, especially in the fighting ranks of the Organization. All this was reflected in the plan of the general struggle against the Ottoman oppressors and against the intensified intervention of the armed propaganda waged by the neighbouring countries.

One of the basic issues, over which there was a split in the Organization was the attitude of the Revolutionary Organization towards Bulgarian nationalism and towards the other Balkan countries. The two basic groups in its ranks sought to gain supporters for their views. One group, represented in Macedonia by Iane Sandanski and in Sofia by Petre Pop Arsov, wanted to remain consistent with the principles of the Internal Organization. This meant that this group wanted the Organization to remain independent of Bulgaria and the other Balkan countries. Therefore, this group didn’t oppose any assistance from official Bulgaria, nor did it want to subordinate the activities of the Internal Organization to the needs of Bulgarian foreign policy.

The other group, the pro-Bulgarian group, which had no prominent supporters in Macedonia and was led by Boris Sarafov, Hristo Matov, Ivan Garvanov and others, insisted that the Internal Organization should rely on official Bulgaria and receive assistance from Bulgaria. This group considered the Macedonian Question as an exclusively Bulgarian issue and therefore agreed to receive directives from Sofia for all its future activities. It was willing to receive financial and other assistance from Sofia without seeking cooperation with other national elements in Macedonia. These were the basic opposites on which the division within the Internal

Organization arose. This division, which mainly existed at the peak of the Organization, soon began to filter down to the lower bodies.

THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION’S POSITION AND ITS ACTIVATION

The Bitola Revolutionary District felt there was a need to sort out the workings of the Internal Organization through a Congress which was initiated in the middle of May 1904. The Congress which lasted until the end of May was held in the villages around Prilep and because of that it became known as the Prilep Congress. The Congress was attended by 13 delegates from the District, including by Damian Gruev, Giorche Petrov, Pere Toshev, Georgi Pop Hristov, Hristo Uzunov, Giorgi Sugare and others, who remained in the field after the Ilinden Uprising. Two delegates from the Solun Revolutionary District also attended. The main topic of discussion was reasons why the Ilinden Uprising failed. Other topics discussed were what to do next. In discussing this issue, two views were expressed: one was to decentralize the Organization, while the other sought to maintain the old centralist form of managing the Organization. A Draft Constitution emerged out of all these discussions which was accepted, indicating that there was some positive tendency and willingness to change the outdated forms of how the Organization was managed.

In January 1905, the Skopje Revolutionary District held a Congress. This Congress, which lasted a week, was held in the village Knezevo, Kratovo region. The new draft constitution, the Organization’s past and future activities, the Organization’s attitude towards propaganda and other economic issues were the subjects of discussion. A rulebook was drafted and accepted during this Congress, as well as ideas on how to improve the workings of the Organization.

The Solun Revolutionary District also showed considerable activities after the Ilinden Uprising. Two congresses were held in this District. The first was held in July 1905 and the second in August 1905. Here too similar issues were discussed with emphasis on the principle of autonomy, as well as the international aspects of the Macedonian Question; the Organization’s attitude towards the Exarchate and the need to punish Boris Sarafov. The Solun Revolutionary District took a very positive stance on a number of

issues concerning the proper conduct of the Revolutionary Organization.

In the summer of 1905, two congresses were held in the Strumitsa Revolutionary District. One was the Strumitsa Region Congress and the second was the Strumitsa District Congress. Both congresses addressed issues related to the further development of the Organization, the attitude of the Organization towards propaganda, the establishment of a special judicial institute in the Organization, the introduction of a tax system and more. The influence of the left came to the fore at these Strumitsa Revolutionary District congresses.

On July 29, 1905, the Seres Revolutionary District held its Congress in the locality “Belemeto”, on Pirin Mountain. Among the delegates who attended was Iane Sandanski, who, after the Ilinden Uprising and following in the footsteps of Gotse Delchev, became an increasingly prominent revolutionary figure. Among other things discussed during the Congress was the current situation in the Country and the status of the Organization with special attention paid to the economic problems in the Country. It was particularly emphasized that the Organization and the development of the Macedonian liberation movement had to remain independent.

During all the general Congresses held by the Organization, in 1904-1905 at the various revolutionary districts, except in Skopje, the views of the left seemed to dominate. It didn’t take too long after the Ilinden Uprising for the organization to recover and once again stand on its own two feet.

The biggest event in the life of the organization in the post-Ilinden period was the General Congress held at the Rila Monastery, called the Rila Congress. There was a great deal of controversy among the delegates over the place where this Congress was held. Many of the delegates, especially those from the interior of Macedonia, demanded that the Congress be held on Macedonian territory. In the end, it was agreed to hold the Congress in the Rila Monastery because a lot of work had to be done so it was necessary for things to go smoothly.

The congress began in early October 1905 and lasted until the end of the month. Included among the delegates who attended were prominent leaders such as Damian Gruev, Giorche Petrov, Iane Sandanski, Pere Toshev and others. The Congress reviewed most outstanding Organizational activities, cultural and educational activities, judiciary, finance, press and more and how the Organization was being managed. Issues regarding the Organization’s attitude towards state propaganda, particularly Bulgarian state nationalism and the Exarchate, the supremacist groups inside and outside the Organization, etc. were discussed with special emphasis.

After lengthy discussions, the Congress elected new governing bodies. A new Central Committee was elected, which included Damian Gruev, Pere Toshev and Todor Pop Antov, while outside of Macedonia Organizational Representation included Giorche Petrov, Dimitar Stefanov and Petre Pop Arsov. Dimo Hadzi Dimov was appointed editor of the Organization’s official newspaper the “Revolutionary List”.

The longest discussion that took place was the issue of managing the Organization, during which the left and right came to the fore. At the end of the discussion, a new Constitution, Organizational Rules and Procedures were adopted, in which the concepts and views of the left were fully accepted. The independence of the Organization and its revolutionary character as well as the principle of democratic centralism served as the basis in forming the Organization’s future activities. The Congress paid special attention to the Organization’s cultural, educational, social and economic activities. At the same time the Congress characterized the Murzsteg reforms as useless and harmful to the Macedonian national liberation movement. Also very harsh words were spoken when it came to the supremacist activities of Tsonchev’s group, as well as the activities of Boris Sarafov. Both Tsonchev and Sarafov were instructed to stop their activities. Unfortunately the expected unity the Congress was supposed to achieve at the Rila Congress never materialized. There was a tragic split in the Organization, which had severe consequences for the course of the Macedonian national liberation movement. The Organization’s right-wing elements or the neo-supremacists didn’t accept the decisions made during the Rila Congress and began to act

independently and destructively under the influence of external factors, alien to the Macedonian national liberation movement. As a result the organization began to fall apart with regards to its revolutionary activities.