Story. Bucharest peace treaty between Russia and Turkey Bucharest peace with the Ottoman Empire
ENSURING THE NEUTRALITY OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE
In October 1806, Russian troops under the command of General I.I. Mikhelson occupied Moldavia and Wallachia, and in 1807 a squadron under the command of Rear Admiral D.N. Senyavina inflicted a heavy defeat on the Ottoman fleet in the Dardanelles and Athos battles. The Serbs, who had been fighting for their independence since 1804, came to the aid of Russia. After a long siege, they captured Belgrade. But the Russian troops achieved particular success after they were appointed commander-in-chief in March 1811. He did not divide the army for the siege of individual fortresses, as his predecessors did, but concentrated the main forces at the large fortress of Ruschuk on the right bank of the Danube. Here, in June 1811, he inflicted a crushing defeat on the Ottoman army, then with successive blows he defeated the main forces of the Turks on the left bank of the Danube in parts. The rest of them laid down their arms and surrendered. In October 1811, peace negotiations began in Bucharest. According to the peace concluded on May 16, 1812 (a month before Napoleon's invasion of Russia), Bessarabia with the fortresses of Khotyn, Bendery, Akkerman and Izmail retreated to Russia. The new border was established along the river. Rod. But in Transcaucasia, Russia returned to the Ottoman Empire the territories with fortresses seized by Russian troops. Bessarabia, which became part of Russia, received the administrative status of the Bessarabia region. Bia was given the autonomy of Serbia, the autonomy of the Danubian principalities - Moldavia and Wallachia - was expanded, although they continued to remain under the vassalage of the Ottoman Empire. The peace of Bucharest ensured the neutrality of the Ottoman Empire during the war of 1812 between Russia and France.
SIGNING OF THE PEACE TREATY
Bucharest Peace Treaty of 1812, ended the Russo-Turkish War of 1806–12. Signed on May 16 (28) in Bucharest on the part of Russia by the chief commissioner M. I. Kutuzov, on the part of the Ottoman Empire Ahmed Pasha. Peace negotiations began in October 1811 in Zhurzhev, after the defeat of the main Turkish forces near Ruschuk and the encirclement of most of them at Slobodzeya. Despite the attempts of the authorized Sultan Galib-efendi to delay the negotiations, the Russian commander-in-chief M.I. Kutuzov achieved their completion a month before the invasion of Napoleon I's army into Russia. This was the main political gain for Russia: her southern borders were safe, and her Danubian army could be transferred to reinforce the troops covering the western borders. Turkey left the alliance with France.
The Bucharest peace treaty consisted of 16 vowels and 2 secret articles. Article 4 established a new Russian-Turkish border along the Prut River (instead of the Dniester), as a result of which Bessarabia retreated to Russia. Article 6 obliged Russia to return to Turkey all the points in the Caucasus, "weapon ... conquered." This wording of the article was the basis for the return of Anapa, Poti and Akhalkalaki taken from the battle, but at the same time the reason for holding Sukhum and other points acquired by Russia as a result of the voluntary transfer to Russian citizenship of the rulers of Western Georgia. Thus, for the first time, Russia received naval bases on the Caucasian coast of the Black Sea. The Bucharest peace treaty provided the privileges of the Danube principalities and the internal self-government of Serbia, which marked the beginning of its complete independence, which was a step forward in the national liberation of the Balkan peoples. The main provisions of the Bucharest Peace Treaty were confirmed by the Akkerman Convention of 1826.
Fadeev A.V. Bucharest Peace Treaty of 1812 // Great Soviet Encyclopedia.
http://slovari.yandex.ru/~%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8/%D0%91%D0%A1%D0%AD/%D0%91% D1%83%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BC% D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9%20%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80% 201812/
DANUBE PRINCIPALITIES AND SERBIA
The Treaty of Bucharest basically posed the problem of the political existence of the Danubian Principalities and Serbia. Among the numerous Orthodox peoples that inhabited the Ottoman Empire, only Serbs, Moldavians and Vlachs could claim both independent political existence and political support for Russia, since only they had formed and developed bodies. internal management and were regions of high political interest for Russian authorities. It was the Danubian principalities that were a strategically important region, border lands between Russia and Turkey, which had a number of political privileges for a long time. It was here that they began and were conducted Russian-Turkish wars, and the local population hopefully turned their eyes towards Russia. The adopted provisions on the autonomy of these constituent parts of the Ottoman Empire, along with the annexation of Bessarabia and the opened up opportunities for merchant navigation along the Danube with access to the Black Sea - everything was connected with the strengthening of trade (and, if possible, military) presence Russian fleet in the Straits, and, consequently, in the Mediterranean. Thus, the conditions of the Bucharest Peace, which decided specific tasks foreign policy Russia, contained the basis for subsequent agreements built on the foundation laid in 1812. First of all, this concerned the fate of the Christian peoples of Turkey.
Support for the political status of Serbia and the Danubian Principalities as autonomies within the Ottoman Empire was extremely important for the further development of the independence of the future Balkan states. The Bucharest Treaty provided for the provision of the rights of Serbia "as far as possible in accordance with the desires of the Serbian nation", which was used by the Serbian side in the coming years to create their own constitution - the Charter, in the development of which Russian diplomats took an active part.
The Ottoman Empire was forced to agree to these conditions even earlier, when in 1812 the Treaty of Bucharest was signed, according to which Russia, in addition, received naval bases on the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus. This treaty summed up the results of the Russian-Turkish war, which began in 1806. The war, launched by the Turks in the hope of weakening Russia after Austerlitz, was fought with varying success until M. I. was appointed commander of the Danube army in 1811. Kutuzov. He defeated the Turkish forces near Ruschuk and at Slobodzeya and forced Porto to conclude peace. This was the first great service rendered by Kutuzov to Russia in 1812. Under the terms of the Bucharest peace, Russia received the rights of the guarantor of the autonomy of Serbia, which strengthened its position in the Balkans.
Greek question. The Vienna system of European balance did not extend to the Ottoman Empire. The Holy Alliance, if interpreted literally, meant the unity of European Christian monarchs against the infidels. Russia widely used its opportunities to provide patronage to the Christian subjects of the Sultan. With the knowledge of the Russian authorities in Odessa, Moldavia, Wallachia, Greece and Bulgaria, Greek patriots were preparing an uprising, the goal of which was the independence of Gredia. Based on the principle of legitimism, Alexander I did not approve of the idea of Greek independence, but he did not find support either in Russian society, or even in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where I. Kapodistria played a prominent role.
In 1821, the Greek national liberation revolution began, led by General of the Russian service Alexander Ypsilanti. Alexander I condemned the Greek revolution and insisted on settling the Greek question through negotiations. Instead of independence, he offered the Greeks autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. The rebels, who relied on the sympathy of the progressive European public, rejected this plan. The Ottoman authorities did not accept him either. To settle the Greek question, at the beginning of 1825, a conference of great powers met in St. Petersburg, where England and Austria rejected the Russian program of joint actions. After the Sultan refused the mediation of the conference participants, Alexander I decided to concentrate troops on the Turkish border. Thus, he crossed out the policy of legitimism and switched to open support of the national freedom movement.
Alexei Petrovich Ermolov and his activities in the North Caucasus. At the same time, Russia sharply increased its military presence in the North Caucasus, a territory that was ethnically diverse and whose peoples were at various levels of socio-economic and political development. There were relatively stable public entities- The Avar and Kazikumyk khanates, the Shamkhalate of Tarkov, patriarchal "free societies" dominated in the mountainous regions, the prosperity of which largely depended on successful raids on the flat neighbors engaged in agriculture.
In the second half of the XVIII century. The northern Ciscaucasia, which was the object of peasant and Cossack colonization, was separated from the mountainous regions by the Caucasian line, which stretched from the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea and ran along the banks of the Kuban and Terek rivers. A mail road was built along this line, which was considered almost safe. In 1817, the Caucasian cordon line was transferred from the Terek to the Sunzha, which caused discontent among the mountain peoples. For the Russian authorities, the inclusion of the Caucasian peoples in the orbit of imperial influence was a natural consequence of the successful establishment of Russia in the Transcaucasus. In military, trade and economic terms, the authorities were interested in eliminating the threats that lurked in the raiding system of the highlanders. The support that the latter received from the Ottoman Empire justified Russian military intervention in the affairs of the North Caucasus.
Appointed to the post of chief administrator of the civilian unit in Georgia and the Caucasus and at the same time commander of the Separate Caucasian Corps, General A.P. Russian Empire territories of mountainous Dagestan, Chechnya and the North-Western Caucasus. From the Tsitsian policy, which combined threats and monetary promises, he moved on to a sharp suppression of the raiding system, for which he widely used deforestation and the destruction of recalcitrant auls. Yermolov felt like a "proconsul of the Caucasus" and was not shy about using military force. Under him, the fortresses Groznaya, Vnepnaya, Stormy were built, which became the strongholds of the Russian troops.
Yermolov's military expeditions provoked opposition from the highlanders of Chechnya and Kabarda. In the 1820s it developed into an organized military-political resistance, the ideology of which was muridism - a kind of Islam adapted to the concepts of the mountain peoples.
We can say that under Yermolov, events began that contemporaries called the Caucasian War. In reality, these were actions of separate military detachments without a general plan, which either sought to stop the attacks of the highlanders, or undertook expeditions deep into the mountainous regions, without representing the enemy’s forces and without pursuing any political goals. Military operations in the Caucasus took on a protracted character.
Russo-Turkish War 1806-1812 Political circumstances and diplomatic pressure from Russia forced the Ottoman Empire to issue a decree (hatisherif) on privileges for Moldova, confirming the provisions of the Sultan's decrees (firmans) of 1774, 1783, 1791, which determined Moldova's material obligations to the Porte: 7-year term of the ruler's rule, the possibility of the resignation of the ruler before the deadline, only with the consent of both parties. But these measures were far from realizing the hopes and the true goal of the Moldovans - liberation from the Ottoman yoke. This goal coincided with the interests of Russia: strengthening its positions in the Balkans, on the Danube. The prerequisites for a new Russian-Turkish military conflict were obvious. On November 29, 1806, Russian troops entered Moldova and entered Iasi. On December 24 the Porte declared war on Russia.
In 1807, Turkey and Russia concluded the Slobodzeya truce in Wallachia, but in 1809 hostilities resumed. A year earlier, on September 30, 1808, Russia and France concluded a secret convention in Erfurt, according to which Napoleon I gave his consent for Moldova to be included in the Russian Empire. In return, Russia recognized the suzerainty of France over Spain. In the spring of 1811, M.I. was appointed commander-in-chief of the Russian troops on the Danube. Kutuzov. As a result of bold military operation Russian troops won the final victory in the battle of Ruschuk (10/14 - 11/18/1811).
Peace negotiations began on October 19, 1811 in Giurgiu and were continued in Bucharest. Russia demanded to transfer to her both principalities, Moldova and Wallachia, which she ruled at that moment. Since neither of the two powers was intent on giving in, the peace talks began in a rather tense atmosphere.
From November 1811, the French ambassador in Constantinople, Latour-Maubourg, urged the Turks to hold out until a future French campaign against Russia. But the Turks, bribed by the generosity of Russian gold, began to yield. In November 1811, they had already agreed that the territory between the Prut and the Dniester should go to Russia, except for the south, which included Chetatya Albe, Izmail and Kiliya. But in March 1812, the Turks ceded Chetatya Alba, and a month later, two other fortresses.
The dynamics of Russian-Turkish negotiations and the participation of external forces are reflected in the correspondence of the American Ambassador Adams in St. Petersburg. On March 21, 1811, he wrote: “The stubbornness of the Turkish Divan in negotiating (with Russia) is due to the influence of France, whose chargé d'affaires said that he persuaded them (the Turks) not to agree to the cession of Moldova and Wallachia, which were already declared part of the Russian empire." On June 22, 1811, he noted that “peace with Turkey is expected” and that “in order to conclude it, there are rumors that Russia has decided to withdraw from the two principalities that it has already annexed to its empire, and leave them to be ruled by princes independent of her and from the Porte. Finally, on July 13 of the same year, Adams pointed to a serious increase in Turkish claims: “They say that in proportion to Russia's desire to make peace, the Turks increase their demands so much that, instead of giving in, they even began to demand monetary compensation for themselves. But the fact remains that for the sake of peace, Russia will not return anything that it has seized.”
In addition to France, Austria and Prussia, Russia's rivals in the region, encouraged Porto not to concede and themselves made offers to Russia. Thus, on April 30, 1811, the Austrian ambassador in St. Petersburg proposed to the tsar "to be content with the border on the Prut River instead of the Danube in order to obtain peace." However, the king wanted to expand the borders at least to Siret. In correspondence with Prince Adam Czartoryski, he “offered” Austria Wallachia and part of Moldova between the Carpathians and the Siret, while Russia was supposed to receive Galicia from Austria and occupy Moldova from the Siret to the Dniester.
But the Turks were adamant. Only on March 22, 1812, Emperor Alexander I agreed to "the Prut as a border to the mouth of the Danube." In the end, the Turks also yielded, and the Russian-Turkish peace was concluded with great solemnity on May 16/28, 1812 in Bucharest. Articles IV and V legalized the division of the Principality of Moldova into two parts:
"Article IV: It was decided that the Prut River from its entrance to Moldavia to its connection with the Danube and the left bank of the Danube from this connection to the mouth of the Chilia and to the sea will constitute the border of both empires, for which this mouth will be common.
Article V: E . led. imp. and padishah all-Russian. gives and returns to the Brilliant Porte the Ottoman land of Moldavia, lying on the right bank of the Prut River, as well as large and small Wallachia with fortresses, in such a state as: they are now, with cities, towns, villages, dwellings and with everything that is in these provinces are not included, together with the islands of the Danube ...
Under the terms of the agreement, the Ottoman Empire ceded to Russia part of the Moldavian territory: the tsinuts of Hotin, Soroca, Orhei, Lapusna, Grechen, Hoternichen, Codru, Tighina, Kirligatura, Falciu, the eastern part of the Iasi tsinut and Budzhak, a total of 45,630 km² with 482,630 inhabitants , 5 fortresses, 17 cities and 695 villages. Thus, Moldova was divided into Western and Eastern Moldova, which the Russian authorities called - Bessarabia.
Consequences of the peace treaty in Bucharest. Chronicler Manolache Dragic (1801-1887) in his work “History of Moldova for 500 years. Until today” (Iasi, 1857) rather emotionally described the dramatic moment of the division of Moldova: “The fateful day came when the agreement expired, and everyone had to stay where he chose to settle permanently; those unforgettable times were full of tears and complaints, because the people, like flocks of sheep, filled the entire bank of the Prut from edge to edge in a huge crowd, gathering from villages and cities for weeks and saying goodbye to their parents, brothers and relatives, with whom they grew up and lived until now and now parted forever.
The same Manolache Dragic spoke about the feelings of the population in the years following the partition of Moldova: “Nevertheless, the inhabitants of Moldova considered the agreement signed in Bucharest to be short-lived, expecting from day to day the return of the land seized by the Russians and the restoration of the former borders, but they were deceived in their expectations ".
1812 became a turning point in the history of Moldova. The Bucharest peace treaty led to a tragic break, Moldova was torn into two parts, and its fate was changed irreversibly.
In 1812, as a result of the Bucharest peace treaty, which ended the Russian-Turkish war of 1806-1812, the territory between the Dniester and the Prut became part of the Russian Empire, which, due to its territorial expansion to the east, strengthened its position in this region of South-Eastern Europe, and the newly annexed territory was seen as a springboard for further advance into the Balkans.
After the division of Moldova, the fate of its eastern part was determined by the aspirations, priorities and geostrategic interests of the Russian Empire. From that moment on, events in this part of Moldova were subject to the logic and interests of the Russian Empire.
The division of Moldova in 1812 was illegal, because Moldova was not a Turkish province, but a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire, and Turkey did not have the right to dispose of its territory. Thus, the process of division of Moldova was continued, which began in 1775, when Bukovina, part of the Moldavian state, was annexed by Austria. And in this process, along with Russia, Turkey, France, Austria-Hungary, Great Britain and Prussia participated.
Although the division of Moldova took place in violation of the norms of international law (of that era), not a single European state and not a single political force in Moldova protested, which allows us to assume that in 1812 Moldova fell victim to a large conspiracy of internal and external forces.
At that time, the Moldovans were not able to determine their own destiny. M. Eminescu rightly believed that our motto should be the words: “Expect nothing and be afraid of nothing. Without relying on anything, we will not trust strangers, as we trusted, but we will rely only on ourselves and those who are forced to be with us; without fear of anything, we do not need to ask for a bounty where it is an exotic plant.
However, the events of 1812 are often considered unilaterally, only as the annexation of the Prut-Dniester space by the Russian Empire. But forgetting, consciously or not, is another aspect of this historical event, namely the liberation from the Ottoman suzerainty, which for centuries dominated Moldova. Some historians tend to downplay the importance of this factor, stating that Ottoman suzerainty has become purely formal, incomparable with previous centuries. We cannot agree with this statement, because if the Ottoman suzerainty was formal, why was Romania (the state that emerged after the unification of Western Moldova with Wallachia) able to achieve independence from the Ottoman Empire only after the war of 1877-1878? at the cost of bloody battles and huge casualties?
We should not forget the fact that the Russian Empire in that era was perceived as a state-liberator of the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula from the rule of the Ottoman Empire. Serbs, Croats, Greeks, Bulgarians, Moldavians saw in the Russians a salvation from the oppressive Ottoman yoke, which eventually acquired sophisticated forms.
After the inclusion of the eastern part of Moldova into the Russian Empire, political, socio-economic, administrative, religious and cultural processes in the region developed under the influence of new realities. However, the new government did not resort to immediate and radical dismantling of the existing administrative structures in Eastern Moldova, did not curtail the privileges of the boyars and other social strata.
Immediately after joining, Eastern Moldova was destined for the role of bait for the Christians of South-Eastern Europe. The tsarist government wanted to show the Balkan peoples a model of enlightened absolutism, liberal ambitions, offering people opportunities for development and prosperity. The tactics of small steps, the gradual introduction of tax system Russia, judicial practice, exemption from mandatory military service(until 1874). After 1812, in order to avoid social tension, the new authorities created temporary administrative structures in Bessarabia, which had much in common with those that existed in Moldova. Eastern Moldova acquired the status of a province in the 80s of the nineteenth century. It took 60 years for the transition from the old administrative organization to the new one.
In the context of the foregoing, it should be emphasized that we must perceive history in all its versatility and complexity, without simplifying anything, and not look for enemies now, based on historical facts that are not always objectively interpreted.
In this regard, we should remember that:
Thanks to Russia's victory over Turkey, Wallachia and Moldova received much more independence: in 1832, the Organic Regulations (constitutional acts of the principalities) developed by the Russian governor in these countries were adopted, a significant development of the economy and the education system was noted, the formation of the people's militia began, Parliaments were created, strengthened all the attributes of statehood.
. The arrival of the Russians was desired and expected by the population. Moreover, delegations from Moldova and Wallachia repeatedly visited the tsar with a request to free them from the hated Turks. It was the liberation of the Orthodox principalities from the Muslims that was the main goal of the Russian military campaign.
. It should not be forgotten that the south of Bessarabia, originally a Moldavian territory, by 1812 had not been controlled by Moldova for several centuries, but was a Turkish district.
. At the same time, it should be noted that in that era, religious self-identification of people, and to a lesser extent ethnic or state identity, was of decisive importance. This was the specifics of the era, which cannot be ignored from the position of today.
. Having occupied these principalities, Russia was ready to grant complete freedom to both Wallachia and Moldova. This was prevented by other states that were not interested in strengthening the positions of Russia and Orthodoxy in the region.
. This was not wanted by the Turks, who were supported by France and Austria-Hungary.
. Having won the war, having completely liberated the part of Basarabia occupied by the Turks (south of the Leova-Bendery line), Russia could not be left with nothing.
. Thus, the blame for the division of Moldova cannot be blamed on Russia alone. France, Turkey and Austria-Hungary are equally guilty of this.
. If we talk about the interests of the population, its standard of living, economic development left and right banks of the Prut, then, of course, in Bessarabia the population always lived better than on the right bank of the Prut.
. Finally, perhaps thanks to the Peace of Bucharest, the Moldavian nation was preserved, and the Moldavian statehood was again revived in new historical conditions giving a chance to the entire Romanian people to return to their ancient roots.
The Treaty of Bucharest was concluded on May 16 (28), 1812 between Russia and Turkey following the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-1812. The treaty consisted of 16 open and 2 secret articles.
In accordance with the treaty, Russia received Bessarabia with the fortresses of Khotyn, Bendery, Akkerman, Kiliya and Izmail. The Russian-Turkish border was established along the Prut River to its confluence with the Danube and the Kiliya channel. Russia retained significant territories in the Transcaucasus, received the right to trade navigation along the entire course of the Danube.
The conclusion of the Treaty of Bucharest ensured the neutrality of the Ottoman Empire in the coming war with Napoleonic France.
Text of the Bucharest Peace Treaty of 1812
In the name of the Almighty God!
His Imperial Majesty the Most Serene and Most Powerful Great Sovereign Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, and His Majesty the Most Serene and Most Powerful Great Sovereign Emperor Ottoman, having a sincere mutual desire that the ongoing real war between the mutual powers be stopped, but peace, friendship and good agreement were firmly restored, it was decided for the good of this righteous and salutary cause to entrust the efforts and leadership of the chief commissioners to this, and namely: from His Imperial Majesty the Autocrat of All Russia, the most illustrious Count Golenishchev-Kutuzov, the general of infantry, the commander-in-chief of the army, all Russian orders, Grand Cross of the Imperial-Austrian Order of Maria Theresa Knight and Commander of the Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem, and from His Majesty the Emperor of the Ottoman, the most illustrious and highly exalted Mr. Supreme Vizier of the Sublime Porte of the Ottoman Agmed Pasha, so that for the resolution, conclusion and signing of the contracts were elected, appointed and subject to full power of attorney from both parties were provided with worthy persons; as a result of which, from the side of the Russian Imperial, excellent and highly respected gentlemen were elected, appointed and authorized: Andrei of Italy, His Imperial Majesty's Privy Councilor, and so on, Ivan Sabaneev, from the Army of His Imperial Majesty, Lieutenant General, Chief of the General Staff of the Danube Large Army, and so on , and Joseph Fonton, His Imperial Majesty Actual State Councilor, and so on; from the side of the Brilliant Ottoman Port, excellent and highly respected gentlemen: Esseid Said Magommed Khalib-efendi, actual kegaya-bey of the Brilliant Ottoman Port; Muftizade Ibrahim Selim-efendi, qazi-askir of Anadol, real judge of the Ottoman army, and Abdul Hamid-efendi, real yecherileri kiatibi, who, meeting in the city of Bucharest, after exchanging their powers, decided the following articles:
Article 1
The enmity and disagreement that hitherto existed between the two lofty empires are henceforth terminated by this treatise, both on land and on water, and may there be peace, friendship and good harmony between His Imperial Majesty Autocrat and Padishah of All Russia and His Majesty the Emperor and Padishah of the Ottoman Empire, their heirs and successors to the thrones and their mutual empires.
Both Highly Contracting Parties will make unremitting diligence to avert everything that could cause enmity between mutual subjects; they will fulfill exactly everything that has been decreed by this peaceful treatise, and they will strictly observe that henceforth, from either side, either openly or secretly, no action is taken contrary to this treatise.
Article 2
The two High Contracting Parties, thus restoring sincere friendship between themselves, deign to grant amnesty and general forgiveness to all those of their subjects who, in the continuation of the war now ended, took part in hostilities, or in any way, contrary to the interests of their sovereigns and states. As a result of this amnesty granted to them, none of them will continue to be offended or oppressed for their past actions, but everyone who returns to his home will use the estate that he previously owned, under the protection and patronage of laws, on an equal basis with others.
Article 3
All treatises, conventions, acts and decrees made and concluded in different times between the Russian Imperial Court and the Brilliant Porte of the Ottoman Empire, is completely confirmed in everything both by this treatise and the previous ones, excluding only those articles that were subject to change from time to time; and both High Contracting Parties undertake to observe them sacredly and inviolably.
Article 4
The first article of the preliminary points, already signed in advance, decided that the Prut River from its entrance to Moldavia to its connection with the Danube and the left bank of the Danube from this connection to the mouth of the Chilia and to the sea, will constitute the border of both empires, for which this mouth will be common . Small islands, which were not inhabited before the war, and starting opposite Ishmael to the aforementioned mouth of Kiliya, are closer to the left bank, which belongs to Russia, will not be possessed by either of the two powers, and henceforth no fortifications or buildings will be made on them, but these islands will remain empty, and mutual subjects can come there only for fishing and logging. The sides of the two large islands opposite Ishmael and Kiliya will also remain empty and uninhabited for an hour's distance, starting from the nearest point on the aforementioned left bank of the Danube; this space will be marked with signs, and the former dwellings before the war, as well as the old Kiliya, will remain beyond this frontier line. As a result of the above article, the Brilliant Port of the Ottomans cedes and gives to the Russian Imperial Court the lands lying on the left bank of the Prut, with fortresses, towns, villages and dwellings located there, while the middle of the Prut River will be the border between both high empires.
The merchant ships of both Courts can, as before, enter the aforementioned mouth of the Kiliya, as well as along the entire course of the Danube River. As for the warships of the Russian Imperial Court, they can go there from the Kiliya mouth to the junction of the Prut River with the Danube.
Article 5
His Majesty the Emperor and the Padishah of All Russia gives and returns to the Brilliant Porte of the Ottoman Moldavian land, lying on the right bank of the Prut River, as well as Greater and Lesser Wallachia, with fortresses, in the state they are now, with cities, towns, villages, dwellings and with everything that is not included in these provinces, together with the islands of the Danube, excluding the above in the fourth article of this treatise.
Acts and decrees regarding the privileges of Moldavia and Wallachia, which existed and were observed before this war, are confirmed on the basis, as decided in the fifth article of the preliminary points. The conditions outlined in the fourth article of the Treaty of Jassy will be exactly fulfilled, and which read as follows: not to require any payment for old accounts, nor taxes for all wartime, on the contrary, the inhabitants of these two provinces will be dismissed from all taxes henceforth for two years, counting from the day exchange of ratifications; and give time to the inhabitants of these provinces who wish to move from there to other places. It goes without saying that this period will be extended for four months, and that the Sublime Porte will agree to assess the taxes of Moldavia according to the proportion of its present land.
Article 6
Except for the border of the Prut River, the borders on the side of Asia and other places are being restored exactly as they were before the war, and as decided in the third article of the preliminary points. As a result, the Russian Imperial Court gives and returns to the Brilliant Porte of the Ottoman, in the state in which fortresses and castles are now located, lying within this border and conquered by its weapons, along with cities, towns, villages, dwellings and with everything that this land contains in itself.
Article 7
The Mohammedan inhabitants of the lands ceded to the Russian Imperial Court, who could be in them because of the war, and the natural inhabitants of other places who remained during the war in the same ceded lands, may, if they wish, move to the regions of the Sublime Porte with their families and name and there forever remain under her rule; in which not only the slightest obstacle will not be put up for them, but they will also be allowed to sell their property to whom they wish from the local subjects and transfer the proceeds for that to the Ottoman lands. The same permission is given to the natural inhabitants of the aforementioned ceded lands, who have their own possessions there and are now in the regions of the Sublime Porte.
At this end, eighteen months are given to both of them, starting from the day of the exchange of ratifications of this treatise, for the disposal of their above-mentioned affairs. Likewise, the Tatars of the Edissapian horde, who crossed over from Bessarabia to Russia during this war, may, if they wish, return to the Ottoman regions, but with the fact that the Sublime Porte will then be obliged to pay the Russian Imperial Court for the costs that could be used for transportation and furnishing these Tatars.
On the contrary, Christians who have possessions in the lands ceded to the Russian court, as well as those who, being natives of these lands themselves, are now in other Ottoman places, may, if they wish, move and settle in the aforementioned ceded lands, with their families and property; in which they will not be hindered in any way, and they are allowed to sell every kind of property that they own in the regions of the Sublime Porte to the inhabitants of the same Ottoman places, and transfer the proceeds for this to the regions of the Russian Empire, they will also be given eighteen months for this end. term counting from the date of exchange of ratifications of the present peace treaty.
Article 8
In accordance with what is decided by the fourth article of the preliminary points, although there is no doubt that the Sublime Porte, according to its rules, will use indulgence and generosity against the Serbian people, as from ancient times a subject of this state and paying tribute to it, however, considering the participation that the Serbs took in the actions of this war, it is recognized as decent to decide on special conditions for their safety. As a result, the Sublime Porte grants forgiveness and a general amnesty to the Serbs, and they can in no way be disturbed for their past deeds. Fortresses that they could build on the occasion of the war in the lands inhabited by them, and which were not there at all before, will be, since they are useless for the future, destroyed, and the Sublime Porte will continue to take possession of all the fortresses, padans and other fortified always existing in places, with artillery, military supplies and other articles and military drugs, and she will establish garrisons there as she sees fit. But so that these garrisons do not do any oppression to the Serbs, contrary to the rights of subjects belonging; then the Sublime Porte, moved by a feeling of mercy, will at this end take with the Serbian people the measures necessary for their safety. She bestows on the Serbs, at their request, the same benefits enjoyed by the subjects of her islands of the Rhipelago and other places, and makes them feel the effect of her generosity, leaving them to themselves the management of their internal affairs, determining the measure of their taxes, receiving them from their own hands, and she will finally dispose of all these things in common with the Serbian people.
Article 9
All prisoners of war, both male and female, of whatever people and state they may be, who are in both empires, must, soon after the exchange of ratifications of this peace treaty, be returned and given out without the slightest ransom or payment, excluding, however, Christians who have accepted of their own will, the Mohammedan faith in the regions of the Brilliant Porte, and the Mohammedans, who also, according to their perfect desire, accepted the Christian faith in the regions of the Russian Empire.
The same will be done with those Russian subjects who, after the signing of this peace treaty, would have been taken prisoner for some reason, and who may be in the areas belonging to the Brilliant Porte. The Russian court promises, for its part, to act equally with all the subjects of the Sublime Porte.
For the amounts used by both High Contracting Parties for the maintenance of prisoners, no payment should be demanded. Moreover, each of the two sides will supply these prisoners with everything they will need on their way to the border, where they will be exchanged by mutual commissars.
Article 10
All cases and demands of mutual subjects, postponed due to war, will not be abandoned, but again considered and decided, by virtue of laws, after the conclusion of peace. The debts that mutual subjects may have on each other, as well as debts on the treasury, must be immediately and fully paid.
Article 11
After the conclusion of a peace treaty between the two high empires, and after the exchange of ratifications by both sovereigns, the ground troops and the flotilla of the Russian Imperial Court will come out of the pretexts of the Ottoman Empire. But how this withdrawal must be considered with the distance of the places and their circumstances, then both High Contracting Parties agreed to set a three-month period, counting from the day of the exchange of ratifications, for a final withdrawal, both on the part of Moldavia and Wallachia, and on the part of Asia. As a result, from the day of the exchange of ratifications until the expiration of the aforementioned period, the ground forces of the Russian Imperial Court will completely withdraw from both the European and Asian sides from all the lands returned to the Sublime Porte of the Ottoman Empire by this treaty; the flotilla and all warships will also leave the waters of the Sublime Porte of the Ottomans.
As long as the Russian troops will be in the lands and fortresses that will be returned to the Brilliant Porte of the Ottoman in accordance with this peace treaty, until the expiration of the period for the withdrawal of the troops, until then the administration and order of things will remain in the state in which they now exist, under the rule of the Russian of the Imperial Court, and the Sublime Porte of the Ottomans will not interfere in any way until the expiration of the period fixed for the departure of all troops, who will supply themselves with all food supplies and other necessary items before last day their way out, in the same way as they have been supplying themselves there until now.
Article 12
When a minister or chargé d'affaires of the Russian Imperial Court, residing in Constantinople, submits a note to claim, by virtue of Article vii of the Treaty of Jassy, satisfaction for losses caused to subjects and merchants of the Russian Imperial Court by corsairs of the governments of Algeria, Tunisia and Tripolye or to protest on subjects pertaining to the provisions of the commercial treatise, confirmed, and which would cause controversy and complaints; in such a case, the Sublime Porte of the Ottomans will turn its attention to the fulfillment of what the treatises prescribe, and that the aforementioned subjects be investigated and resolved, without any omission of the prescriptions and publications to that end published. The Russian Imperial Court will observe the same thing in the reasoning of the subjects of the Sublime Porte in accordance with commercial regulations.
Article 13
At the conclusion of this peace treaty, the Russian Imperial Court agrees that the Brilliant Porte of the Ottomans, in the similarity of worship with the Persians, use their good offices so that the war between the Russian Court and the Persian state is over, and peace is restored between them by their mutual consent.
Article 14
Upon the exchange of the ratifications of this peace treaty by the plenipotentiaries of both empires, orders will be sent mutually and without delay to all the commanders of the troops, both land and sea, to stop hostile actions; those that followed after the signing of this treatise are to be considered as if they had not happened, and will not cause any change in the decrees depicted in this treatise. In the same way, everything that would have been won by one or another of the High Contracting Parties during this intertemporal period will be returned immediately.
Article 15
Upon signing of this peace treaty by mutual plenipotentiaries, the plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of All Russia and the Supreme Vizier of the Brilliant Port of the Ottoman will confirm it, and the acts will be exchanged with the same powers in ten days after the signing of this treaty, and sooner, if possible.
Article 16
This treatise of eternal peace on the part of His Majesty the Emperor and Padishah of All Russia and on the part of His Majesty the Emperor and Padishah of the Ottoman Empire, has to be approved and ratified by solemn ratifications signed by Their Majesties' own hand, which should be exchanged by mutual plenipotentiaries in the same place where this very the peace treaty is concluded, in four weeks, or as soon as possible, counting from the date of the conclusion of this treaty.
This peace act, containing sixteen articles, and which will be accomplished by the exchange of mutual ratifications within the prescribed period, is signed by the strength of our powers, approved with our seals and exchanged for another similar one, signed by the aforementioned plenipotentiaries of the Brilliant Port of the Ottoman and approved by their seals.
Done at Bucharest, May 16th, 1812.
warsonline.info
COLLECTION OF DOCUMENTS
Russian State Military Historical Archive (RGVIA),
Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA)
"Treaty of Bucharest (1812)"
About the project Documents
E.P. Kudryavtseva
Peace of Bucharest 1812 - Russia's breakthrough into the Balkans
The Peace of Bucharest, concluded by Russia and the Ottoman Empire on May 16 (28), 1812, following the results of the Russian-Turkish war, was one of the most important political and strategic documents that formed the basis of Russia's geopolitical doctrine in the Balkans. This peace treaty, along with the Treaty of Kuchuk-Kainarji of 1774, which for the first time allowed the Russian authorities to “make representations” in favor of the Christian subjects of the Porte, became the starting point on which all further Russian-Turkish documents were based, containing normative acts of the political existence of the Danube Principalities. and Serbia within the Ottoman Empire.
The peace of Bucharest was a major diplomatic victory for Russia. It significantly strengthened its position on the southern borders - Russia turned into a Danubian power, retained the regions in the Caucasus and the Black Sea coast with the city of Sukhumi that voluntarily joined it. Only the conquered lands and fortresses were returned to Turkey, but Mingrelia, Imeretia, Guria and Abkhazia, which voluntarily became part of Russia, remained with Russia. The terms of the treaty for the first time recognized the right of the Serbian people to have a number of self-government bodies while being part of the Ottoman Empire, which provided Serbia with certain opportunities for future political development. The treaty recognized the autonomous self-government of Moldavia and Wallachia, as well as the accession of Bessarabia to Russia. The change in the southwestern border was important, since it now ran along the left bank of the Danube to its mouth and the Black Sea, which was of strategic importance for the defense of the Russian Empire.
First of all, the conclusion of the Treaty of Bucharest should be considered as a positive political step on the eve of the war with Napoleon. Indeed, on the eve of the war with France, Russia sought to end the protracted military conflict with the Ottoman Empire: Alexander I ratified Treaty of Bucharest Literally the day before the invasion great army" in Russia . As a result of the peace concluded, Russia managed to ensure the neutrality of Turkey before the decisive battle with Napoleon. However, the significance of the Bucharest Peace is not limited to the creation of a favorable strategic climate on the eve of the war with France.
The peace concluded in Bucharest demanded great diplomatic skill from the Russian representatives and was the undoubted merit of M.I. Kutuzov, who negotiated with the Ottoman representatives. In the autumn of 1811, Kutuzov received instructions from St. Petersburg with peace conditions acceptable to Russia. But since the Turks were not ready to start negotiations at this time, Kutuzov had to resume hostilities, defeat the Turks at Ruschuk, and only then return to discussing peace terms. In his secret rescript dated March 22 (April 3), 1812, Alexander I wrote to Kutuzov: “You will render Russia the greatest service by hastily concluding peace. I most convincingly appeal to you with love for your Fatherland to turn all your attention to the achievement of this goal. Glory to you will be eternal ... ". On the Russian side, the agreement was signed by the Russian envoy in Constantinople A.Ya. Italinsky, General of the Moldavian Army I.V. Sabaneev and the first dragoman of the Russian mission in Constantinople I.P. Fonton. The Turkish delegation was headed by Galib Efendi and included Ahmet Pasha, Commander-in-Chief of the Turkish Army.
Signing the contract, the researcher V.N. Vinogradov, Kutuzov assumed a colossal responsibility - after all, despite the fact that the emperor directly pointed out the need to sign a treaty, its terms did not at all correspond to the claims of Russia. Back in the summer of 1810, Kutuzov received instructions from St. Petersburg to seek from Turkey the concession of Moldova and Bessarabia, as well as monetary compensation. Only after Kutuzov managed to convince the Turkish side that the mission of Napoleon's adjutant Count of Narbonne to Alexander's headquarters would result in Russian-French agreements directed against Turkey itself, the Ottoman government hastened to conclude an agreement with Russia. Ahmet Pasha expressed his thoughts quite frankly in a conversation with Fonton when he said that the reconciliation of Russia and Turkey was the main task of the moment, since they should "take care of the common defense" . The fact that the conclusion of such an agreement was possible, the French side considered unbelievable - after all, even the day before, in February 1812, Napoleon tried to convince the Sultan of the need to sign a Franco-Turkish alliance that would allow Turkey to lay claim to the vast Russian territories of the Black Sea and Transcaucasia. The fact that the scales leaned on the Russian side, the French emperor considered incredible - in June 1812 he directly asked Adjutant General A.D. Balashova: “Is it true that you made peace with the Turks? ... if you claim, as they tell me, the border along the river. Rod, then nothing will come of it, rest assured. The signing of the peace was kept in great secrecy and caused the appearance of numerous rumors about the content of the articles of this document. Later, when Napoleon wrote his memoirs on Fr. Helena, he admitted that after the news of the Bucharest peace, he should have abandoned the campaign against Russia - after all, instead of two potential allies - Turkey and Sweden, who could pull the flanks of the Russian army to the north and south - he faced the only enemy , which strengthened its political position through the Russian-Turkish and Russian-Swedish agreements. Thus, according to Napoleon's associate Count F.-P. Segur, possible friends of France became her enemies, and the 50,000-strong Moldavian army could, forgetting about the Turkish threat, take part in the battles on the western front.
A separate issue of the signed agreements was the fate of the Caucasian lands. Even before the signing of the peace, Kutuzov admitted to Rumyantsev that he intended to sign on the Caucasus "a dark and confusing article that ... would give us the opportunity ... to insist on keeping for us what is now being dealt with by our troops." Indeed, Kutuzov intended not to withdraw troops from the occupied territories. However, the British intervened in this issue, who, according to Admiral Chichagov, "thought only of what harm could be for British India if Russia established itself in the Caucasus." As a result of peace, Russian troops evacuated from Anapa, Poti and Akhalkalaki, but remained in Sukhumi and Redut-Kala, controlling almost the entire coast of Abkhazia, Megrelia and Guria. Russia acquired a section of the Black Sea coast with a length of 200 km. Despite the fact that the demands of the Porte in this matter were fully satisfied, the dispute over the ownership of the Caucasian territories remained for a long time one of the main points of discussion in Russian-Turkish relations. If Ghalib Effendi demanded a return to the “status quo ante bellum” position, then the Russian side insisted that only territories occupied by the “force of arms”, but not voluntarily annexed, that entered Russian citizenship before the start of the war, were subject to return. As Kutuzov expected, the article regarding the position of the Caucasian lands for many years remained the most "dark and confusing" in a long series of Russian-Turkish contradictions. Apparently, it was precisely the conditions of the Caucasian settlement that caused the sultan, upon receiving the news of the conclusion of the Bucharest peace, to order the execution of the Turkish dragoman who signed the agreement, not daring, however, to completely abandon its execution. However, it should be noted that in Romanian historiography there are suggestions that the conclusion of peace is a consequence of the betrayal of the Ottoman deputies. The executed Dimitri Moruzi allegedly found a ring worth 12,000 lei and documents for the ownership of an estate in that part of Moldova that was ceded to Russia. documentary evidence there is no confirmation of this thesis, and the very assumption of this kind probably arose precisely because the conclusion of peace was of particular importance for Russia. No wonder E.V. Tarle highly appreciated the significance of this document: “Kutuzov, a diplomat, considers E.V. Tarle - inflicted a heavy blow on Napoleon in 1812 even earlier than Kutuzov the military leader.
However, one cannot discount the self-sufficiency of the terms of the agreement for all subsequent Russian policy in the Balkans and the development of the concept of geopolitical priorities throughout the Middle East region, including the Straits. One of the most important, and perhaps the main, consequences of the Bucharest Treaty was the opportunity for Russia to control the implementation of all articles of the treaty, build further Russian-Turkish relations on this and use them to strengthen its influence in the vast Balkan Peninsula by ensuring the political development of the Orthodox peoples subject to the Porte. - Moldavians, Vlachs, Serbs, Greeks.
The political situation in Europe on the eve of the conclusion of the treaty remained extremely difficult. In 1807, the Tilsit Agreement was concluded between Alexander I and Napoleon, as a result of which Russia became an ally of France. According to the Russian-French agreements, the two European powers divided the spheres of their political interests. As a result, France got Western Europe, and Russia - Eastern, including the Balkans, which have become the object of close attention of the Russian government. According to preliminary agreements, Russia strengthened its influence in the Danubian principalities and Serbia, and France - in Albania, Dalmatia and Kotor. The final text of the Russian-French alliance, signed on June 25, 1807, no longer contained these conditions, but implied the mediation of Paris in relation to all controversial Russian-Turkish issues. Of course, this provision could not meet the interests of the Russian side, since the success of its policy in the Ottoman Empire directly depended on the absence of third intermediary parties that violated a possible Russian-Turkish agreement.
Despite the rapprochement between Russia and England in the face of the threat of Napoleonic aggression, Russian-English contradictions could not be considered completely eliminated. At this time, Russia could not claim to be a worthy adversary of Great Britain in the Mediterranean basin - the former positions that it occupied in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Adriatic were lost, and the Russian-Turkish treaties of 1799 and 1805, which gave significant advantages to the Russian fleet in the Straits, ceased to operate. Moreover, according to the Anglo-Turkish treaty of 1809, the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, at the insistence of Great Britain, were closed to warships of all powers, which was a significant blow, especially for the Russian fleet. However, at the conclusion of the Bucharest Peace, England was on the side of Russia - after all, the terms of the peace were beneficial to the Russian ally of Great Britain and strengthened its military power on the western borders of the Russian Empire. At the same time, the concepts of Russia and England regarding cooperation with the Ottoman Empire differed significantly. If Great Britain stood in the position of maintaining the status quo in the Balkans, then plans for the establishment of new semi-independent Christian states on the vast territory of the Ottoman Empire, relying on the help of Orthodox Russia, became widespread in the Russian ruling circles. These plans for the creation of a separate or common Slavic-Serbian state, uniting several Slavic peoples within its borders, were purely hypothetical constructions that did not have a certain political support from the government, but they expressed the general trends of Russia's future policy in the Balkans quite clearly.
The Treaty of Bucharest basically posed the problem of the political existence of the Danubian Principalities and Serbia. Among the numerous Orthodox peoples that inhabited the Ottoman Empire, only Serbs, Moldavians and Vlachs could claim both independent political existence and political support for Russia, since only they had formed and developed internal government bodies and were regions of high political interest for the Russian authorities. . It was the Danubian principalities that were a strategically important region, border lands between Russia and Turkey, which had a number of political privileges for a long time. It was here that the Russo-Turkish wars began and were waged, and the local population turned its gaze towards Russia with hope. The adopted provisions on the autonomy of these constituent parts of the Ottoman Empire, along with the annexation of Bessarabia and the opened up opportunities for merchant navigation along the Danube with access to the Black Sea - everything was connected with the strengthening of the commercial (and, if possible, military) presence of the Russian fleet in the Straits, and, consequently, , and in the Mediterranean. Thus, the terms of the Peace of Bucharest, which solved the specific tasks of Russia's foreign policy, contained the basis for subsequent agreements built on the foundation laid in 1812. First of all, this concerned the fate of the Christian peoples of Turkey.
Support for the political status of Serbia and the Danubian Principalities as autonomies within the Ottoman Empire was extremely important for the further development of the independence of the future Balkan states. The Bucharest Treaty provided for ensuring the rights of Serbia “as far as possible in accordance with the desires of the Serbian nation”, which was used by the Serbian side in the coming years to create their own constitution - the Charter, in the development of which Russian diplomats took an active part.
In general, Russia's diplomatic support for the Serbian liberation movement and the desire to draw the attention of European powers to the problem of the oppressed Slavic peoples testified to the growing role of the eastern direction in Russia's foreign policy and its intention to support the Orthodox subjects of the Porte in their struggle against Ottoman oppression. An attempt to draw attention to Turkish Christians during Congress of Vienna, and then an open break in diplomatic relations with the Ottoman Empire in 1821 after the start of the Greek Revolution - all these were consistent steps of the Russian government in one direction. The Eastern problem has taken its place once and for all among Russia's foreign policy priorities. All further peace initiatives of the Russian government, as well as attempts to resolve disputed Russian-Turkish issues by military means, were based on the agreements signed in Bucharest.
After the end of the Congress of Vienna and the creation of the Holy Alliance Russian government intensified the Balkan direction of its foreign policy, which was a consequence of the peace signed in Bucharest in 1812. It was the articles of the Bucharest Treaty that appeared in all subsequent agreements between Russia and the Ottoman Empire as the foundation of their interaction and allowed the Russian leadership to come up with reasonable demands for the unconditional fulfillment of all the conditions of the adopted agreement. References to the Treaty of Bucharest sounded like a refrain during the Russian-Turkish discussions, which were conducted in Constantinople for six years by the Russian envoy G.A. Stroganov on the political structure of Serbia and the Danubian Principalities. The treaty is mentioned in later Russian-Turkish documents - the Akkerman Convention of 1826 and the Adrianople Treaty of 1829, the terms of which were of exceptional importance for further fate Balkan peoples: the self-government of the Danubian principalities expanded, Greece and Serbia received autonomy.
Kuznetsova G.A. Diplomatic debut of Alexander I. Peace of Tilsit // Russian diplomacy in portraits. M., 1992. S. 117.
Cit. on: Munkov N.P. Kutuzov is a diplomat. M., 1962. S. 88.
Kudryavtseva E.P. Russia and the formation of Serbian statehood. 1812-1856 M., 2009.
