III.

The Making Of Romania Keith Hitchins The idea of a nation: The Romanians of Transylvania,1691-1849 -The intellectuals drew Romanian thought into a closer communion with Western Europe than it had ever before experienced. Their own ideas betrayed a distinctively Western and modern spirit. Yet, they were not Westernized. Timotei Cipariu (1805 1887)Simion Barnutiu (1808 1864)August Treboniu Laurian (1810 1881)Ioan Rusu (1811 1843)George Baritiu (1812 1893)Iosif Many (1816 1851)Aron Pumnul (1818 1866)Avram Iancu (1824 1872)Alexandru Papiu-Ilarian (1827 1877) -Romanian intellectuals were by large economic liberals. They advocated the least possible, restraints on economic activity, arguing for competition among producers, the dissolution of the guilds, the elimination of internal and foreign tariffs, and the abolition of serfdom. In a positive vein, they favored the rapid expansion of modern, capitalist forms of production in all branches of the economy, especially in industry. -They wanted to create a prosperous middle class, the absence of which, in their view, had deprived thei nation of the modern leadership Western Europe enjoyed. -They had come to recognize the peasants as the nation, and they realized that their own accomplishmentsphilosophy, poetry, history, economic theory- would be of little avail if the mass of the population were kept in perpetual economic bondage. -The attitude of the intellectuals toward the Orthodox and Uniate churches ad toward religion in general reveals the same interweaving of rationalism and liberal ideologies with the pursuit of concrete nation goals. -The intellectuals treated the church mainly as a social institution. Recognizing the immense services it had rendered the nation in the past as the preserver of the national language and of national customs, they intended to make full use of it to attain their own objectives. But in the modern world, they argued, the role of the church could no longer simply be that of a repository of past treasures. It must commit itself to the solution of contemporary problems and must become truly national institution as responsive to the material needs as to the spiritual welfare of its faithful. -In order to make the church a more effective instrument of the national revival, the intellectuals strove to liberate the Uniate and the Orthodox churches from Hungarian Roman Catholic and Serbian Orthodox domination, respectively. -A new vision had thus become dominant in the thought and aspirations of the Romanian generation of 1848. Nation as defined not by religion but by language and history, and it embraced at last all Romanian, regardless of cass or confession. Although the progressof the nation had become the focus of their energies, Romanian intellectuals did not cease to feel themselves a part of Europe. Influenced by the heritage of the Enlightenment and by the romantic and liberal current of the new century, they saw no contradiction between a commitment to national goals and feelings of brotherhood with all European peoples. They still thought of progress not in terms of isolated ethnic communities but as a general advance of humanity. Such ideals were to be severely tested by revolution. Stephen Fischer Galati Romanian Nationalism- The nation Triumphant I.The Romanian revolution of 1848 was in the first instance a revolution of the intellectuals. It was they who formulated goals and devised strategy. These, in turn, were grounded in a world of ideas specific to the historical evolution of Romanian society: reasoned change carried out by reasonable men to promote the common good. Yet, they were at the same time idealists. They believed wholeheartedly in human progress, in the unlimited ability of men to improve their condition through the reform of their institutions. Like their counterparts elsewhere in Europe,

they professed faith in the swift and glorious transformation of society. Unfortunately, as events were to show, they misjudged the rhythm of change in history and foresaw the collapse of the old regime before they had any right to expect it. Their optimism in 1848 and their deception in 1849 had their origins in the idea of nation, in the sentiment that ethnic self-determination was the key to general human progress. The establishment of a greater Romanian state has been the dream of poets and patriots and the slogan of ambitious politicians and demagogues for over one hundred years. Romanians have been urged to fight all oppressors and find glory in a resuscitated modern Daco-Roman state. The rediscovery of the national past began in the eighteenth century, when Bishop Inocentiu Micu-Klein, the Latin Scholar and his disciples in the Transylvanian Latinist School traced the spoken language of the Romanian to the inhabitants of ancient Rome. This meant chronological primacy for the Romanian nation over latecomers. Through Inocetiu Micu-Kleins Supplex Libellus, and later on through Supplex Libellus Valachorum, the Romanians asked for equal rights as the Magyars, Szekles and Saxons. Other national rights included the incorporation of Romanians into the Magyar-dominated oligarchy, political representation in Transylvanias political institutions and cessation of discriminatory practices. -The flight of Metternich to Vienna on March 13, the proclamation of the liberal reform by young radicals in Pest on the 15th, and the formation of a new Hungarian government I Pressburg headed by Louis Bathyany on the 17th produced a strong reaction in Transylvania. Magyar liberals everywhere were stirred by the hope that at last political and economic reform was at hand. But they were also committed to the progress of the Magyar nation, and they supported the union of Transylvania and Hunagry as a means of assuring its existence, Magyar conservatives, on the other hand, especially the large ladowners were far less sanguine about the future. They greeted declarations of reform particulary those concerning landlord-peasant relations, coldly, but they embraced the idea of union as necessary to maintain Magyar, and hence, their own predominance. -Cipariu saw little reason for the Romanian and the other non-Magyar nationalities to fear the union of Transylvania with Hungary. He had complete faith in the attachment of Magyar liberals to the ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity, and he predicted that the new diet would be elected in accordance with these enlightened principles and would, therefore, guarantee the right of all peoples to develop freely as separate national entities. It was inconceivable to him that men who he proclaimed themselves liberals could act otherwise. -George Baritiu professed to having been overcome with emotion upon receiving reports of the events in Western Europe and Vienna. He discerned they key to the future development of Transylvania in the union of the principality with Hungary, the reform of the reforms, as he called it. He was well aware of the reason why the Magyar nobility and others supported the union, but like Cipariu he rejected the thesis that if carried out, the destruction of the Romanian nation would inevitably follow -March 25 they dispatched a petition to the emperor urging him to sanction the Magyar liberals program which included the union of Transylvania with Hungaty. Avram Iancu and Alexandru Papu Ilarian were among signers. -The first public manifestation of concern for the consequences of the union was the proclamation drawn up by Simion Barnutiu on March 24. - Barnutiu made the preservation of Romanian nationality the paramount issue of the day. He argued that the Romanian, the descendants of the Romans, had for too long been denied their rightful place among the nations of Transylvania. Now, they had an opportunity to recover all that had once been their, but they had to proceed With their eyes open, lest they lose their most precious possession their nationality.

- In the month following the circulation of Barnutius proclamation, Romanian leaders in Blaj, Cluj, Targu Mures, Sibiu and Muntii Apuseni met almost continuously. Out of their deliberation emerged the sketch of a national program and the decision to convoke a representative assembly to discuss and approve it. The first preparatory meeting took place in Blaj at Timotei Ciparius home on March 25. - Several participants in the Blaj meeting went at once to Targu Mures to obtain the support of Romanian lawyers . They quickly reached agreement with Avram Iancu and a number of his colleagues on the place and time of the national congress- Blaj April 30. - Similar meetings were held wherever Romanian intellectuals formed an active community. One of the most important took place in Cluj on March 28 when Romanian lawyers and students made a reply to the pro-union demonstrations of their Magyar colleagues. -Most significant also as an indication of the direction the national movement was taking was their decision to invite to the Congress Romanina leaders from Banat and Crisana and those Transylvanians who were residing in Wallachia and Moldavia. They were also determined to proceed with the meeting of April 30 in defiance of Governor Telekis prohibition - April 30 => some 5 000-6 000 - The time had come for all Romanians to enjoy once again ancient rights and privileges. -Barnutiu urged the peasants to return home and tell their neighbors what they had heard and seen and then in 2 weeks return to Blaj for the great assembly. His listeners emptied the square with the same calm and dignity that they had shown throughout the days proceedings. -By the beginning of May, Barnutiu had gained the support of all Romanian leaders except two George Baritiu and the newly elected bishop of the Orthodox Church Andrei Saguna On the 8th Barnutiu and other leaders agreed upon the essentials points of their program: rejection of the unconditional union of Transylvania with Hungary and the creation of an autonomous Romanian nation as a constituens part of Transylvania -May 15 in a meadow Campia Libertatii, outside Blaj where some thirty thousands peasants had gathered during the preceding week. - The Sixteen Points was a characteristic manifesto of the intellectuals of 1848 in Central Europe. It represented the most comprehensive and forceful statement of Romanian aspirations made up to that time, and in its essentials it provided the national movement with its program for the next half century. Barnutiu and his supporters no longer justified their demands on the basis of historical right or imperial patent but rather upon a principle they believed to be universally valid: the natural rights of man. They now extended these rights, subsumed under the slogan liberty, equality, and fraternity, from indivduals to entire nations. Their preoccupation eith the nation is nowhere more evident than in the Sixteen Points themselves. -2 delegations were chosen to represent the assembly before the Court of Vienna and the Transylvania diet in Cluj. II.The Transylvanian government persisted in its refusal to recognize the existence of a separate Romanian nation. The government also suspected the committee of promoting a pan-Romanian movement, the alleged goal of which was the creation of a Daco-Romanian state extending from the Black Sea to the western boundaries of Transylvania

The initiative for some sort of pan Romanian action seems to have come mainly from the Wallachians TA G Golescu and Ioan Maiorescu representatives of the new Wallachian provisional government both of whom passed thorough Transylvania on diplomatic missions to the West, suggested a united Romania undet either Austian or Russian auspices. In more lyrics trms Alecu Russo, an exile from the abortive revolution in Moldavia in April, spoke of one powerful nation, with the sea and two rivers as barricades and with Roman blood in our veins, no longer Moldavia, nor Transylvania nor the Banat, but only Romania, with its capital to be named Rome. -June 20- the diet decided that most of their grievances had already been satisfied, since the union had made them full citizens of the new Hungary. It recommended that the Romanians take up any unresolved questions through their representatives in the Hungarian diet in Pest. - The delegation to Vienna May 30 had presented the Sixteen Points to Emperor Ferdinand in the form of a petition . Their haste had been dictated by anxiety to forestall imperial sanction of the union of Transylvanian and Hungary but their mission had been an utter failure. - june 23 a small group led by Saguna returned to Innsbruck. Ferdinand received their petition but he repeated his earlier statement that the laws enacted by the Hungarian Diet had already satisfied the major points they had raised. The recommended that they negotiate directly with the Hungarian government on matters of detail. -Sept 27 the commission approved a bill which recognized the Romanian nationality and the autonomy of the uniate and Orthodox churches , allowed the free use of the Romanian language in village affairs, the church, and elementaruy and secondary schools, and provided for the appointment of Romanians to public office in proportion to their numbers. -The battle lines between the two main antagonists the Austian Court, and the Magyar liberals and nationalist led by Louis Kossuth. -Kossuth grated the Romanians political autonomy. He offered amnesty to all Romanians except Saguna whom he accused of treason, and promised full rights of citizenship and the use of their language in churches and schools, the courts and local government, but he refused to compromise the political unity of Hungary. - July 29- The act of desperation otr Austrian and Russian armies, which had finally intervened on a large scale in May, were closing in on tihe few remaining Hungarian strongholds and had rendered their opponents military position utterly hopeless. -August 13- In Transylvania a host of Austrian officials, led by the new governor Gen Ludwing Wohlgemuth, descended upon the principality with instructions to restore it to the status of an imperial province as quickly as possible. - Bu the fall of 1850 the intellectuals finally accepted deafeat -Paradoxically, Romanian intellectuals came out of the revolution with an enhanced confidence in their ability to amanage their own affairs; the gobern romanesc had demonstrated, at least to their satisfaction, their capabilities of self-government. Matters had gone well enough during those few months to convince them that their nation could achieve genuine progress only if it were free to determine its own future under its own leaders. To achieve their goals they turned from a preoccupation with abstract principle to practical wuestions of political organization and economic development, matters which increasingly absorbed their energies down to 1918.