Multimedia Mania/abacus-multimedia-mania.iso/dp/0042/00423.txt

Text File | 1993-07-27 | 30KB | 496 lines

$Unique_ID{bob00423}
$Pretitle{}
$Title{Romania
Chapter 2A.   Historical Setting}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{Eugene K. Keefe}
$Affiliation{HQ, Department of the Army}
$Subject{romanian
political
war
century
romania
romanians
transylvania
principalities
party
national
see
pictures
see
figures
}
$Date{1972}
$Log{}
Title:       Romania
Book:        Romania, A Country Study
Author:      Eugene K. Keefe
Affiliation: HQ, Department of the Army
Date:        1972

Chapter 2A.   Historical Setting

     Romania's history as an independent state dates from about the middle of
the nineteenth century; as a communist state, from about the end of World War
II. The history of the Romanian people, however, is long, complex, and
important when considered in the context of the overall history of the Balkan
region. The origin and development of the Romanians remain controversial
subjects among Romanian and Hungarian historians, whose arguments serve to
support or deny claims to rightful ownership of large areas within Romania's
borders (see fig. 1).

     Until the end of World War II Romania's history as a state was one of
gains and losses of territory and shifting borders. As the Ottoman Empire in
Europe receded, the Romanians found themselves pressured by the Russian and
Austro-Hungarian empires. Borders arranged by the victorious powers after
World War I increased Romania's territory but also increased its minority
population, particularly the Hungarian. Between the two world wars the country
experienced a period of fascist dictatorship and aligned itself with Nazi
Germany early in World War II, but it eventually overthrew the fascists and
finished the war on the side of the Allies.

     The borders arranged after World War II formalized the loss of territory
to the Soviet Union but have remained stable since the end of the war. In the
postwar chaos of the late 1940s, with Soviet troops occupying the country,
Romania deposed its king and emerged as a communist state under the close
scrutiny and supervision of its powerful northern neighbor, the Soviet Union.
After the death of Josef Stalin the Romanian leadership began a slow pursuit
of nationalist goals, which continued in the early 1970s. Although the
Moscow-Bucharest ties have often been strained, the Romanians have carefully
avoided a break that would provoke a reaction such as the Soviet-led invasion
of Czechoslovakia in 1968.

     The Romanian people see themselves as a Latin island surrounded by Slavs
and Magyars (Hungarians). They are proud of their long, distinctly different
historical development and consider that their history is important to them as
proof of their ethnic uniqueness in the area and as proof that Romania belongs
to the Romanians.

Early Origin

     The earliest recorded inhabitants of the area included in present-day
Romania were Thracian tribes, known as Dacians, who settled in the area well
before the Christian Era and established a major center in Transylvania (see
fig. 2). These people practiced a primitive form of agriculture and engaged in
limited trade with Greek settlements along the western coast of the Black
Sea. By the middle of the first century A.D. the Dacians had grouped
themselves into a loosely formed state ruled by a series of kings who
attempted to expand their power to the north and west and, most aggressively,
to the south into the area below the lower Danube River.

     In their advance southward the Dacians came into conflict with the
Romans, who, during the same period, were attempting to extend their control
over the Balkan region and to push the northern border of their empire up to
the natural barrier formed by the Danube River. In a series of campaigns
between A.D. 101 and 106, the Roman emperor Trajan succeeded in conquering the
areas known as Banat, Oltenia, and Walachia and in finally reducing the Dacian
stronghold in Transylvania. After consolidating and unifying his control over
the people, Trajan fortified the area, stationed Roman legions in garrisons at
strategic points, and organized the region to serve as a province of the Roman
Empire.

     As a border province, Dacia developed rapidly and became one of the most
prosperous in the empire. Colonists were brought in from other parts of the
empire, cities were built, agriculture and mineral resources were developed,
and profitable commercial relations were established with other regions under
Roman control. The province proved vulnerable to periodic barbarian
incursions, however, and toward the end of the third century the Roman emperor
Aurelian was forced to abandon Dacia and withdraw the Roman troops to defend
similarly threatened areas farther to the south.

     Aside from the romanization of the native population, little evidence of
the occupation survived the Roman evacuation of Dacia. Among the traces of the
Roman presence remaining were the vestiges of Christianity introduced in the
second century and the legacy of the name of the future state of Romania as
well as the Latin basis for its language.

     Lacking natural geographical barriers to invasion from the east and
south, the greater part of the Dacian territory was overrun by successive
waves of barbarian invaders for ten centuries after the withdrawal of the
Romans. Little is known of the fate of the Daco-Roman population during this
long, turbulent period until new settlements inhabited by a Latin-speaking
people known as Vlachs emerged on the Romanian plains in the eleventh century.
Although historic records are lacking, these Vlachs were believed to be
descendants of the earlier Daco-Roman colonists, many of whom either sought
refuge in the Carpathian Mountains of Transylvania or migrated south of the
Danube River to escape the invaders. Having survived, they returned to
reestablish themselves in their historic homeland.

     The succession of barbaric invasions exploited and devastated the
country. The Germanic Goths were followed by Slavs and Avars, and not until
the Bulgars overran the area in the seventh century was a semblance of civic
order established. The region developed a rudimentary form of cultural life,
and Christianity in the Eastern Orthodox form was introduced after the
conversion of the Bulgar Tsar Boris in 864. The Bulgars were eventually
displaced by Hungarians who, in turn, gave way to Asiatic Tatars, all of whom
left limited, but lasting, influences on the land and its inhabitants.

Formation of the Principalities

Walachia and Moldavia

     As the threats of invasion diminished, the Vlachs gradually moved farther
into the foothills and plains of the Danube basin and fused with a population
that, while retaining a small Vlach element, had by then acquired a heavy
mixture of Slavs and Tatars. Two distinct groups eventually emerged, one
settling in the area now known as Walachia and the other settling farther to
the east and north in Moldavia. The earliest events surrounding the
development of these areas are not known, but after a period of colonization
the two regions emerged, in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,
respectively, as the semi-independent principalities of Walachia and Moldavia.

     When the Ottoman Empire overran southeastern Europe in the fifteenth
century, these Danubian principalities were forced to accept Turkish
suzerainty and remained Turkish dependencies until the middle of the
nineteenth century. Unlike other areas under Turkish rule, the Romanian
principalities were controlled by native princes, who maintained their
position through concessions to the nobles, from among whom they had gained
preeminence, and through the concurrence of the Turks, to whom a substantial
annual tribute was paid. This system of political control led to intrigues and
a long succession of rulers who, assisted by the nobles, systematically
exploited the peasantry, from whom the heavy annual tribute was collected.

     Continued misrule and long-term economic exploitation of the regions
seriously affected the social structure within the principalities. The lesser
nobility, including the landed gentry, was reduced to the level of free
peasants; the peasantry itself was placed in virtually complete serfdom; and
cultural activity became almost nonexistent. Even the appearance of
outstanding political and military leaders, such as Michael the Brave of
Walachia (1593-1601) and Stephen the Great, prince of Moldavia (1457-1504),
could not reverse the general trend of deterioration, although the harshness
of the fuedal system was somewhat lessened during their tenure in office.

     At the beginning of the eighteenth century the Ottoman Empire began to
decline, and the Turks instituted a system of direct control over Walachia
and Moldavia, in order to ensure the continued receipt of maximum revenue from
the countries. Greek merchants known as Phanariots, named for the Phanar
district of Constantinople, which was their center, were invested as rulers in
the principalities upon direct payment of large sums of money. Since their
period in office was indefinite and generally lasted only until outbid by a
successor, an even more intensive system of exploitation within the countries
was introduced to extract greater tribute in shorter periods of time. This
period of oppressive rule lasted until 1821 and proved to be the most
disastrous experienced by the inhabitants. Conditions under this corrupt
system became almost intolerable and led to massive resistance and eventually
to the heavy migration of the peasantry into neighboring areas, particularly
Transylvania.

Transylvania

     The historic development of Transylvania was substantially different and
more complex than that experienced by the principalities of Walachia and
Moldavia. Overrun by Asiatic Magyars as early as the ninth century, the region
was organized originally as a province in the eleventh century. In order to
strengthen this eastern outpost, the Hungarians encouraged two groups of
people-Szeklers, or Szekelys, an ethnic group of people akin to the
Hungarians, and Germans-to emigrate from the west into the area. Although
these colonists eventually reached substantial numbers, the native Romanian
speakers remained in the majority (see ch. 4).

     With the expansion of Turkish power, Transylvania became the battleground
for opposing Turkish and Hungarian forces. Under Turkish pressure Hungarian
control declined in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and by 1526 the
region had become a semiautonomous principality ruled by Hungarian princes but
still subject to Turkish authority. At the end of the sixteenth century
Michael the Brave, the ruler of Walachia and Moldavia, succeeded in revolting
against Turkish rule and united Transylvania with the other Romanian
territories. This union, however, was short lived, and all three
principalities subsequently reverted to Turkish control. Toward the end of the
seventeenth century Austria conquered Hungary, and Transylvania as part of
Hungary then was included in the Astro-Hungarian Empire.

     From the earliest times the position of the Romanians in Transylvania was
inferior to that of the other nationalities, and accounts of the long-term
measures practiced against them have been perpetuated among their descendants.
The Romanians were mostly serfs, and their social and economic status was the
lowest in the province. Their Orthodox Christianity was not recognized, in
contrast to the Lutheran, Calvinist, Unitarian, and Roman Catholic faiths
practiced by the various other nationalities (see ch. 5). To gain religious
equality and to win a larger measure of economic and social recognition, many
of the Romanians gradually abandoned their Eastern Orthodox creed and became
Uniates by accepting papal authority in 1698.

     Although the Romanians were slow to benefit from the relatively high
cultural and political level reached in Transylvania under the
Austro-Hungarians, an appreciable number of concessions had been made to them
by the middle of the nineteenth century. They began to share in the political
life after political parties were established, schools were opened for
Romanian children, and education became more widespread among the general
population. Progress in these and associated fields stimulated the Romanian
desire for full equality and the hope for eventual unification of all
Romanians in their own national state.

Western Influences

     Although Romania was late in achieving national recognition, many of
the factors that were to influence its Western orientation after independence
began to evolve as early as the seventeenth century. In Transylvania the
Uniate church became an important medium by which Romanian national identity
was fostered in the struggle against foreign assimilation. The Habsburg rulers
favored the expansion of the church and permitted the opening of seminaries
for the training of young Romanian clergy. Many of these young clerics were
sent to Rome to complete their studies and, while there, became aware of their
Roman ancestry. They saw the famous column of Trajan, which recorded, in
stone, the early conquest of their Dacian ancestors by the Romans, and they
also discovered that Romanian was an essentially Latin language (see ch. 4).

     The contacts established with Rome encouraged the scholarly development
of a "Latinist" movement in the homeland in the late eighteenth century, which
produced many adherents among the Transylvanian Romanians. It was the efforts
of this group that led to the replacement of the Cyrillic alphabet, then in
common use, with the Latin, the writing of the first latinized Romanian
grammar and, later, the introduction of the first dictionary that traced
the full historical development of the Romanian language. These forms helped
to create a uniform literary language as an essential basis for the broad
development of Romanian culture (see ch. 7).

     During their long experience under the Habsburgs and Hungarians, the
Transylvanian Romanians also became intimately associated with the events of
central and western Europe. Opportunities for trade and cultural contacts that
later developed were also predominantly within Western areas and intensified
the political consciousness of the Romanians along Western lines.

     Meanwhile, in Walachia and Moldavia interest in Western ideas and affairs
was provided by French influences introduced initially by the Greek Phanariot
princes, who were in power during most of the eighteenth century. These rulers
established French as the court language, and many of the Greek merchants,
clergymen, and teachers who followed them into the areas helped spread the
use of French among the urban population in Bucharest and Iasi, the
respective capital cities. Gradually, French was introduced into Romanian
schools, and eventually Romanian students from the principalities were sent
abroad in considerable numbers to study at French universities.

     In addition to Romanian students, many of the young sons of Romanian
nobles traveled in France. These two groups gradually formed the nucleus
of an intellectual class, which favored French philosophy and thought and
which became receptive to the liberal ideas of the French Revolution and later
periods.

National Independence

     A phase of major significance and a turning point in Romanian history
began in 1821 with a revolt led by Tudor Vladimirescu, a Romanian and former
officer in the Russian army. This uprising against the harsh Phanariot rule
was the first with a national character, and it attempted to give expression
to the revolutionary ideas of emancipation and independence. Although the
outbreak was suppressed by the Turcks, it did achieve the objective of
bringing about the early abolition of the Phanariot regime and the restoration
of Romanian princes as rulers in the Danubian principalities.

     After the Russo-Turkish war from 1826 to 1828 Russian forces occupied
both Walachia and Moldavia to ensure the payment of a large war indemnity
by the Turks. Under the ensuing six-year enlightened and competent rule of the
Russian governor Count Pavel Kiselev, the foundations were laid for a new
Romanian state. The first constitutional assemblies were organized along
identical lines in each province; a rudimentary governmental administration
was established and modeled on that of the French; an educational system
was begun; commerce and a modest industry were encouraged; and provisions
were made for the creation of a national militia. The intentional similarity
in the fundamental laws that were also enacted in each area further encouraged
the two principalities to develop side by side.

     During the two decades after the departure of Russian occupying forces,
the national movement within the two principalities continued to grow under
the rule of native princes who had been restored to power. Considerable
stimulation was provided by the 1848 revolutionary events in France, the
basic ideas of which were imported by the French-educated Romanians.
Dissension arose, and street demonstrations took place during which demands
were made for freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, as well as for
the unification of all Romanians in one independent state. Similar
emancipation efforts were also organized in Transylvania, but they, too, were
forcibly repressed, as were those in Walachia and Moldavia.

     Despite the setbacks suffered by the intellectuals and other leaders of
the revolutionary movement, the modern ideas of liberal government took firm
root and continued to flourish. The dispute between Russia and Turkey that
culminated in the Crimean War, however, provided the actual opportunity for
the first step toward ultimate independence. French and Russian collaboration
at the Congress of Paris, which concluded the war in 1858, succeeded in
producing agreements that finally led to the establishment of the autonomous
United Principalities of Walachia and Moldavia in 1859.

     Although still subject to Ottoman authority, the United Principalities
moved rapidly under their newly elected leader, Alexander Cuza, to further
unify and modernize themselves. Cuza fused the administration of the two
principalities into a single government, established a single capital at
Bucharest, and changed the name from United Principalities to Romania.
Domestic reforms were also undertaken, among which were the emancipation of
the serfs in 1864, the institution of a broad land distribution program, the
introduction of free and compulsory education, and the adoption of the French
civil and penal codes as the basis for a revised legal system. Political
parties on the Western pattern began to take form as well, the conservatives
representing the large landowners and the liberals representing the new urban
class.

     The reforms instituted by Cuza were bold and progressive, but his methods
proved to be harsh and unpopular. Forced to abdicate in 1866, he was succeeded
by a German prince, Charles of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen. Charles, who reigned
from 1866 to 1914, extended the reforms initiated by Cuza. He gave the country
its first formal constitution modeled after that of the Belgians, built the
country's first railroad, and modernized and enlarged the small army. In 1878
the country's full independence was recognized by the Treaty of Berlin, which
ended the two-year Russo-Turkish war in which Romania participated as an ally
of Russia. The Kingdom of Romania was proclaimed formally in 1881 with the
crowning of Prince Charles in Bucharest as Carol I.

     The period from 1878 to 1918 brought significant advances in Romania,
largely in the economic and political fields. Under the initiative of King
Carol I and with considerable backing from German capital, new industries
were started, and others were expanded; railroad and port construction was
emphasized; and the considerable petroleum resources of the country were
developed and exploited. The goals of political parties and leaders became
more clearly defined, and modern government institutions, including a
bicameral parliament, were organized.

     Economic and formal political progress, however, was not matched by
similar advancement of democratic processes in the social field. The liberal
provisions of the 1866 Constitution were circumvented under the authoritarian
governmental system, leaving much actual power in the hands of the landed
aristocracy. The slowly rising middle class and small number of industrial
entrepreneuers were granted some rights, but the increasing number of
industrial workers and the great peasant majority shared very little in the
political life of the country.

     A major peasant revolt in 1907 attempted unsuccessfully to rectify the
serious social imbalance. The uprising was forcefully suppressed with
extensive loss of life and, although some corrective measures were later
instituted that improved working conditions and resulted in the division of
more large landholdings, the general political strength and living standards
of the peasants and workers were not materially improved. Related also to
this social unrest was another problem that grew more intense during the
latter half of the nineteenth century-that of the increasing size and economic
importance of a large Jewish minority.

     Forbidden to own land and subject to many other restrictions, the Jews
had settled in urban areas, engaged successfully in commercial activities
and, as a class, gained economic influence and position generally out of
proportion to their overall numerical strength in the population. To an
unusual degree, they formed the prosperous urban middle class, overshadowing
the far smaller number of native Romanians in that category. In rural centers,
as moneylenders, they also became the middlemen between landlords and
peasants; as such, the Jew became a symbol of oppression, which over the years
was transferred into intense anti-Semitism. Consequently, the Jews were
included as a target in the 1907 uprising, and the animosity shown then
remained a feature of later Romanian society.

World War I

     At the outbreak of World War I in 1914 Romania's leaders were indecisive
and proclaimed an armed neutrality, which lasted for nearly two years. Much of
the pro-Russian and pro-French political orientation of the 1840s and 1850s
still existed in the country, but this was offset in large measure by the
strong ties of King Carol I with Bismarck's Germany and by the rapprochement
with Germany that had resulted from the large investment of German capital in
the country. In addition, territorial inducements, which were attractive to
Romania, were made by each side to influence its entry into the conflict. The
Central Powers offered Bessarabia to be taken from Russia, and the Allies
promised the cession of Transylvania from Austro-Hungary.

     After the death of King Carol I and the accession of his nephew, King
Ferdinand, to the throne, Romania entered the war on the Allied side in 1916.
By December 1917, however, Romania was forced to conclude an armistice when
the Russian forces disintegrated on the Balkan front after the Bolshevik
revolution of that year. Before the armistice was ratified, however, and as
the defeat of the Central Powers was becoming apparent, the Romanian army,
which had not been demobilized, reentered the war, liberated Burcharest from
the Germans, and occupied much of Bessarabia and Transylvania. After the war,
in response to the expressed will of the popular assemblies in Transylvania,
Bessarabia, and Bukovina, those provinces were united with the Kingdom of
Romania-often called the Old Kingdom. Formal treaties in 1919 and 1920
confirmed these decisions, and virtually all Romanians were finally reunited
within the historic homeland.

Interwar Years, 1918-40

     With the annexation of Transylvania, Bessarabia, and Bukovina, postwar
Romania, sometimes referred to as Greater Romania, doubled in size, as well
as in population. Included among the newly acquired population were large
ethnic minorities-principally Hungarians, Germans, and Jews-whose diverse
backgrounds and development presented complex social, political, economic,
and administrative problems for the Romanian government. The various
traditions of the people within the acquired lands could not easily be
transformed into new patterns, largely because of the government's reluctance
to share power with any political leaders except those representing the
Transylvanian Romanians. As a result, minority elements were largely excluded
from national affairs, and discriminatory policies developed that bred
resentment and increased political instability (see ch. 4).

     The immediate postwar years were dominated by the Liberal Party of the
Old Kingdom. The party instituted a series of land reforms, fostered increased
industrialization, and sponsored a broadly democratic constitution in 1923,
which made the new state a centralized constitutional monarchy. The
Transylvanian Romanians, long accustomed to considerable autonomy and
self-government under Hungarian rule, resented the imposition of central
control, especially under the administration of officials from Bucharest.
In protest, a new party, the National Peasant Party, was formed in 1926 by
a fusion of the Transylvanian National Peasant Party with the Peasant Party in
the Old Kingdom.

     Other parties were active during this early period, but all were
overshadowed by the Liberal Party and the National Peasant Party. The Social
Democratic Party had been organized at the beginning of the twentieth century
but, lacking any sizable number of industrial workers, the socialist movement
remained weak. After the Russian revolution, however, the radical left-wing
elements of the Social Democratic Party seceded and formed the Romanian
Communist Party in 1921. The Communists went underground after being banned in
1924 and were largely ineffective until after World War II.

     The death of King Ferdinand in 1927 and the elections of the following
year brought significant changes in the Romanian government. Ferdinand's son,
Carol II, was excluded from the succession because of his earlier renunciation
of all claims to the throne to accept exile with his mistress, Magda Lupescu.
A regency was therefore appointed to rule in the name of Carol's young son,
Michael, and a new government led by Iuliu Maniu and the National Peasant
Party was elected, thus ending the six-year tenure of the Liberals.

     Although Maniu's government instituted a series of reforms intended to
improve general economic and social conditions, its efforts were largely
offset by the adverse effects of the worldwide depression of the early 1930s.
Also, early dissatisfaction with the regency resulted in the return of Carol
II from exile and his assumption of the crown in late 1930. His agreement to
sever relations with Magda Lupescu was not kept, however, and in protest Maniu
resigned the premiership. In the unstable conditions that followed, King Carol
II emerged as the chief political figure in the country, and his rule evolved
into a royal dictatorship.

     King Carol's assumption of power was aided initially by the rise of a
fanatical fascist and anti-Semitic group known as the Iron Guard. This group
was strongly pro-German and employed tactics similar to those of the Nazi
party, which was then emerging as the dominant political force in Germany. The
fascist movement, with financial and indirect support from Germany, increased
the influence of the Iron Guard, which was reflected in the 1937 elections.
The coalition government that resulted supported King Carol but was later
overthrown, bringing to power a new coalition of right-wing extremists.

     In order to halt the increasing threat to his power, Carol proclaimed
a personal dictatorship in 1938 and promulgated a new constitution that
abolished all political parties and instituted censorship and other control
measures. This action was followed by the suppression of the Iron Guard, whose
leader, Corneliu Codreanu, was shot. Absolute authority was maintained by the
king, who was supported by the army and by the National Renaissance Front,
a monopoly party that he founded later in the same year.

     Internal instability and uncertainty were aggravated by rapidly
developing international events that threatened the security of the state. The
swift rise of Germany under Adolf Hitler resulted in the annexation of Austria
in 1938 and the subsequent dismemberment and absorption of Czechoslovakia.
These actions, unopposed by the Western powers, were early warnings of
weakness in the Western-oriented collective security system on which Romania
had depended since World War I. The lessening of confidence in the West led
Romania in 1939 to conclude a treaty of economic collaboration with Germany.
This agreement greatly increased German influence in the country and placed
the extensive Romanian oil and other resources at Germany's disposal for later
wartime use.

     Although Romania's territorial integrity had been guaranteed by both
Great Britain and France after the fall of Czechoslovakia, these assurances
were nullified by the early German military successes achieved following the
outbreak of World War II. After the conclusion of a nonaggression pact with
the Soviet Union in August 1939, Germany invaded and occupied Poland and, by
mid-1940, had defeated France and forced the evacuation of the European
mainland by British forces. Faced with the loss of its two strongest partners
in the alliance system and with the aggressive ambitions of the two strongest
totalitarian powers on the European continent-Germany and the Soviet
Union-Romania had little chance of continued independent survival.