Discussion
Notwithstanding the fact that the ideological framework of nationalism has been intensively studied, the way nations perceived events which led to ideological crisis and/or had disastrous consequences for their expansionist policies undermining their Great Ideas still remains overlooked. In this context, the present paper will attempt to shed light on the vacillations of the Bulgarian national narrative in periods of national disaster, that is the first Bulgarian National Catastrophe which came as the aftereffect of the Bulgarian participation in Balkan Wars.
More explicitly, the grandiose envision for the creation of the Great Bulgaria of San Stefano (1878) which had remained on paper, involved Bulgarians in a prolonged period of warfare starting from the Balkan Wars in 1912-1913. Longing to include within the state borders the co-nationals living in the Ottoman Macedonia and Thrace, Bulgarians entered the first Balkan War (1912-1913) as members of the Balkan Alliance against the Ottoman Empire. However, in spite of the fact that the Bulgarian military campaign was stunningly successful and Bulgarians achieved certain territorial gains in Macedonia and Thrace, the diplomatic developments during the discussions of the peace settlement in London were detrimental for the Bulgarian irredentism.
Despite the success of the Bulgarian troops in the siege of Adrianople, one of the largest cities in the Ottoman Empire and one of the few fortresses left in Ottoman control, the subsequent peace conference in London failed to find a peaceful division of the spoils among the belligerents. Romania’s demands for territorial compensation as a reward for its neutrality led the Great Powers to put under intense diplomatic pressure Bulgaria in order to give up
Dobroudja. These developments made Bulgaria even more determined to hold on to as many possible of its gains in Macedonia and Thrace. The Bulgarians argued for proportionality, claiming that each belligerent should be compensated according to the effort they have made during warfare, which was a convenient doctrine for Bulgarians since they had mobilized far more men and had a much higher rate of casualties. The negotiations not only were as futile as it was expected but also caused an intense political climate in Bulgaria which led to the succession of the prime minister
Geshov by Danev. By categorizing the content of the newspaper articles, the research will attempt to answer the following questions: a) how did public opinion cope with events that led to national catastrophe? b) Is a national catastrophe capable of putting an end to national expansionism and appeasing national sentiments? d) To what extent the concept of the hostile National Other, which usually refers to nations, internalized and attributed to those who were responsible for the national catastrophe?
