Tzankov instructed his diplomatic agent to draw the attention of Boerescu to the fact that the Romanian government should not refer this matter to the imperial Ottoman government, because “the Sublime Porte has no authority to give orders to the government of H. H. the Bulgarian Prince”.

The misunderstanding soon subsided and on September 24, 1880, Dragan Tzankov, after a meeting with Boerescu sent a telegram to the diplomatic agent in Bucharest, which had to dispel any doubts about the good relations between Romania and Bulgaria: “I am convinced that the Romanian government has not taken express steps in Istanbul in connection with the issue of consular jurisdiction and any grounds for this misunderstanding have been removed. We have full confidence in the conciliatory and friendly disposition, which the government of His Royal Majesty has always manifested.”

The young Bulgarian diplomacy at the time also had to work for the solution of a number of issues concerning the transport communications and trade between the two neighbouring countries. With a letter by Konstantin Stoilov of February 10, 1881, the Bulgarian government requested from its Bulgarian agent in Bucharest Kiriak Tzankov information about the standpoint of Romania on the joining of the Bulgarian and Romanian railways (at the same time heated debates on this issue went on in the National Assembly). “The Princely government,” the letter said, “would like to know the attitude of the Romanian government towards the linking of the Bulgarian and the Romanian railway lines, how does it see the points of Vidin, Rahovo, Nikopol, Svishtov and Ruse, and would it accept two points of junction, for example, Vidin and Ruse or Vidin and Rahovo.”

From this letter it is evident that as early as in 1881 the Bulgarian government insisted that the transport communications between Romania and Bulgaria be effected through two points (bridges). Upon receipt of this letter the Bulgarian diplomatic agent requested a meeting and on February 16 he talked with the Foreign Minister of Romania Boerescu. In his report of February 17, 1881, K. Tzankov informed his ministry of the standpoint of the Romanian foreign minister as to where the railway and transport junctions between the two countries should be constructed. The Romanian government was ready to conclude an agreement on the point of Svishtov right away, and if it should be completed, in the autumn to move in parliament the construction of the Romanian part of the line. “Regarding the Vidin point,” the Bulgarian diplomatic agent added, “he told me the Romanian government does not favour it because it would not bring any benefit to Romania.”

The Bulgarian diplomatic agent in Bucharest had the opportunity to meet the representatives of the great powers accredited to the Romanian capital and duly informed his ministry about his talks with them. In his letter of October 16, 1882, he advised K. Stoilov that he was visited by the ambassador of the United States of America in Bucharest, Skyler, who expressed a desire on his forthcoming trip to Ruse to be presented to the Bulgarian Prince. A quick reply came back from the Bulgarian foreign ministry that Prince Alexander Battenberg would receive Skyler in Ruse and give a dinner in his honour.

During the first months of 1885 the attention of the Bulgarian diplomatic agent in Bucharest G. Nachovich was focused on the efforts to conclude a trade agreement between Bulgaria and Romania. By a letter dated May 29, 1885, Foreign Minister I. Tzanov asked the Bulgarian diplomatic agent to give concrete “proposals for the conclusion of a trade agreement between the two governments”.

The Union of the Bulgarian Principality and Eastern Rumelia effected on September 6, 1885, and the Serbo-Bulgarian war that followed changed the situation in South-eastern Europe. The Romanian government carefully observed the developments and the conduct of the Great Powers. After the successful outcome of the Serbo-Bulgarian war in defence of the Union, in Bucharest there was extensive discussion of a statement by the Bulgarian Prince about a Balkan confederation. The Bulgarian diplomatic agent in Bucharest G. Nachovich, after a conversation with King Carol and Romanian politicians, informed the Bulgarian minister of foreign affairs about Romania’s fears from an eventual further complication of the situation in the Balkans, generated by rumours of other forthcoming Bulgarian actions like the Union.

In another report dated July 9, 1886, Nachovich again underlined the Romanian apprehensions, enhanced by certain statements of Alexander Battenberg. “The Romanians are very much afraid of any complications in the Orient, because they fear an all-European war, which might drown the small nations in the East,” the report said. The firm Romanian position, containing serious warnings, was also reported. “Bratianu plainly told me today that the Romanians are so apprehensive of any irrational move on the part of Bulgaria that if it should happen that the Bulgarians again try to alter the state of affairs in the East, the Romanians will consider it a direct attack on their vital interests.”

The diplomatic correspondence between Bucharest and Sofia during the grave crisis in which the Bulgarian Principality fell under the pressure of outside forces and internal conflicts, which led to the abdication of Prince Alexander Battenberg, speaks of positive trends in the relations between the two neighbouring countries in this extremely hard for Bulgaria period. In his report of December 4, 1886, the Bulgarian diplomatic agent in Bucharest acquainted his minister with his discussion of the Bulgarian crisis with the Romanian King: “His Majesty said he always sympathised with the Bulgarian people and in its times of crisis he, as well as his government, have helped as they could. It would be his pleasure, he said, to see Bulgaria free of the crisis in which it is now. The King said we should reconcile with Russia, which is a great nation.”

The Romanian King continued the conversation about the relations between the two countries by saying that for now there were no particular problems to be resolved, but the conclusion of a trade agreement and the linking of the Romanian and the Bulgarian railway lines should be promptly considered. “He dwelled on the benefits for both Romania and Bulgaria from a line across Bulgaria connecting Sofia with Romania.”

Next year, 1887 was no less hard for the Bulgarian government and diplomacy, which used every available resource to win support for the policy pursued. The charge d’affaires of the Bulgarian diplomatic agency in Bucharest D. Todorov, coming out from a working meeting with the Romanian Prime Minister Ion Bratuanu on February 21, 1887, hurried to inform the Bulgarian Premier of the good words said about the Bulgarian government and people. The Romanian Prime Minister “praised the government” and said that all Europe wondered “at the intelligent, energetic vitality the Bulgarian people has shown”.

In another report to Minister G. Stranski of October 6, 1887, Todorov again wrote of the good disposition of the Romanian political circles and public towards Bulgaria. The results of the ordinary national assembly elections, held in Bulgaria on September 27 the same year, were approved of not only by the political circles, which were always sympathetic to Bulgaria, but also by the opposition press, which noted that “the national consciousness in Bulgaria has greatly improved” and the support which the people give to its government in this case would be “of immense importance for the European world and for the success of the struggle for freedom and independence led by Bulgaria”.

The good relations with Romania in this period acquired great importance for Bulgaria and in a letter dated April 21, 1888, the Bulgarian foreign minister Stranski instructed the charge d’affaires of the Bulgarian diplomatic agency in Bucharest D. Todorov to reassure the Romanian government of Bulgaria’s will for friendly and good neighbourly relations and be a mouthpiece for “the feelings and sincere desire of the Principality government to maintain in the future these relations, full of accord and harmony”. A year later, on August 22, 1889, the charge d’affaires of the Bulgarian diplomatic agency in Bucharest P. Mateev also reassured Minister Stranski of the good disposition of the Romanian government towards the policies of the Bulgarian Principality. At the audience he had with the Romanian Foreign Minister A. Lahovari the minister assured him of the will “to follow consistently the best relations between the two governments”. Lahovari also brought up the need to conclude a trade convention between Romania and Bulgaria and settle the issue of linking the railway Ruse-Varna via Kaspichan and Shumen to Yambol, “on which will depend the determination of the points for construction of a bridge over the Danube”. From these talks it became evident that the Romanian Premier Lahovari expected the Danube bridge to be built between Gurgevo and Ruse. P. Mateev wound up his report to the Bulgarian foreign minister with the good news that the Romanian King has conferred his order on three Bulgarian senior officials: the chief secretary Mr. Panayotov, the director of the Statistics Office Mr. Slavkov, and the Ruse District Governor Mr. Obretenov, on the initiative of the Romanian diplomatic agent in Sofia Djuvara.

The proclamation of Bulgaria’s independence (September 22, 1908) opened a new stage in the relations between the two neighbourly countries. On June 16, 1909, the Bulgarian diplomatic agency in Bucharest became a legation, and on July 19 the same year Hristofor Hesapchiev handed his letters of credence to King Carol I in his capacity of first Bulgarian envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Romania.

In the early period of diplomatic relations between Bulgaria and Romania a number of bilateral agreements and conventions of mutual interest were concluded:

Postal convention (July 10, 1896); Telegraph agreement and postal convention (1897); Convention on the telephone service (1901); Convention on the measures for preservation and fishery in all parts of the Danube pertaining to Romania and Bulgaria (November 29, 1901); Resolutions for extension of the trade agreement (1902/1903, 1903/1904, 1904/1905, 1905/1906); Provisional trade agreement (1907); Trade and maritime agreement (September 20, 1907); Convention on the fairway of the Danube between Bulgaria and Romania (January 1, 1908); Protocols of the Joint Committee for the river border between Bulgaria and Romania of 9 (22) October 1909.

Stoyan Raichevsky