Is this comprehensible/comprehendible

[snade17]

Hi, again. Do you find it easy to understand the following in terms of language:

"The Ottoman protectorate of Eastern Rumelia was allowed to join the independent Bulgarian Principality in the autumn of 1885. Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire reached an agreement that the Bulgarian principality and Eastern Rumelia have a common government, parliament, administration and army. The only difference between the two parts of the country, kept till the Independence of Bulgaria, declared on 22 September 1908, was the fact that the Bulgarian prince was to be appointed general-governor of eastern Rumelia only by the Sultan."

[David L.]

"The Ottoman protectorate of Eastern Rumelia was admitted into the independent Bulgarian Principality in the autumn of 1885. Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire reached an agreement that the Bulgarian principality and Eastern Rumelia have a common government, parliament, administration and army. The sole administrative

difference between the two parts of the country, (in force till the Independence of Bulgaria, declared on 22 September 1908), was (the fact-omit)

that the Bulgarian prince was to be appointed general-governor of eastern Rumelia only by the Sultan."
This is not clear. Does it mean, that it was the sultan, not Bulgaria, who would appoint the governor-general of eastern Rumelia, BUT that it would be a Bulgarian prince who was appointed (not an Ottoman, and not someone from east Rumelia? Or, just not an Ottoman

[snade17]

Thank you very much, David. I got the point. Does this sound OK:

" The sole administrative difference between the two parts of the country (in force till the Independence of Bulgaria, declared on 22 September 1908) was that only the sultan could appoint the knyaz (Bulgarian prince) governor-general of Eastern Rumelia. "