|
Prehistory
The human presence in this area dates from immemorial times. Traces of his presence were discovered in Valachia even since the inferior Paleolithic age, 600.000 years ago. As to the middle Paleolithic age, human presence is confirmed in the caves. Concerning the superior Paleolithic age, at least 16 levels of dwellings were discovered in the archeological station of Ripiceni.
A warmer and more humid climate was registered during the Neolithic age. The archaeological discoveries also confirmed the presence of a sedentary agricultural population, as well as the existence of human agglomerations. The Cucuteni culture, represented by a very beautiful ceramics, as well as the Hamangia culture, are worth being emphasized.
Geto-Dacians
The presence of the Indo-European Thracians is noticed in the Carpathian-Danubian area, during the Bronze Age (since the middle of the 3rd millennium) and, afterwards, during the Iron Age (since the 11thcentury BC). Herodotus considered them the most numerous people after the Indians. The Thracians living in the northern region of the Danube were divided into Dacians (in Transylvania) and Getas (in Walachia and Moldavia). The Scythians from the North of the Black Sea and the Celts (that came from the West since the end of the 4th century) penetrated in this space and the germans got into Moldavia. In spite of that, the Geto-Dacians remained in majority and assimilated the other populations to a great extent.
An expedition achieved by Darius in the years 514 reached the regions of the Danube. It was Alexander the Great who achieved a feat of strength on the left Getic bank of the Danube in the year 335 B.C. A few decades later, Lysimach, Alexander the Great’ s general, tried to subdue the territories of the Getas, but the Getas’ king Dromichaites defeated him. The Greeks settled colonies on the West Coast of the Black Sea – Histria, Tomis, Callatis – since the 7th and the 6th centuries and they had economic, political and certainly military relationships with the Getas’ heads of the area.
The flourishing period of the Geto-Dacian civilisation Was during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC and the 1st century AC.
The buildings raised mainly in the South of Transylvania – powerful fortifications and a sanctuary, in the area of Gradistea Muncelului – prove the development level of this civilisation. The reign of the king Burebista and that of the king Decebal represented these moments. Burebista (82-44 BC) managed to unify all the political structures of the Getas and the Dacians, creating a state structure that ranged beyond the Dacian area, towards Olbia, on the seaside of the Black Sea.
After Burebist’s death, the Geto-Dacians split again. The Dacian State was remade during the first decades of the 1st century AC, under Decebal’s energetic reign. Real wars, which accurred during the reing of the emperor Domitianus, replaced the attrition wars against the Romans. The expedition commanded by Cornelius Fuscus turned into a disaster in the year 87; the following year, his succesor, Tettius Iulianus, managed to defeat the Dacians headed by the king Decebal, but he suffered was concluded in the year 89, but its conditions were definitely in favor of the Dacians. Their king became “the client of the Roman Empire”, and received important subsidies, as well as military assistance and war machinery.
Roman Dacia
After twelve years of peace, the hostilities were resumed in the spring of the year 101. This time, the vigorous emperor Trajan considered the conditions of the treaty signed in 89 as being humiliating for the Romans. That is why he started the war, as he wanted to solve the Dacian problem, through the extension of the Empire.
The war lasted a year and ended by the conclusion of a peace too, therefore, by the maintenance of the Dacian State. However, Decebal was forced to pull down his fortifications and even to agree with the idea that the Roman troops should station in his capital Sarmizegetusa, situated in the South of Transylvania. It was just an ephemeral peace.
The second Dacian war took place between the years 105-106. Trajan engaged no less than 12 legions in it. The Dacians’resistance was fierce, however Decebal was defeated, his capital conquered and the Dacians’ sanctuaries and the kingdom turned into an imperial Roman province. Decebal killed himself. In the year 107, Trajan’s victory was celebrated and he was conferred the title of Optimus Princeps. The festivities lasted no less than 123 days in Rome and were attended by 10.000 gladiators and 11.000 wild beasts! The Column of Trajan in Rome and the monument Tropaeum Trajani in Dobrudja evoke the Daco-Roman wars. Dacia became a province of the Roman State and was called “Dacia Felix”, due to the prosperity it reached. Colonists that came from all parts of the huge Roman Empire were added to the Getic-Dacian population.
The Romanization process was achieved rather rapidly. This process was facilitated by the various links – economic, political and military, as well as cultural – that existed between the Geto-Dacians and the Romans since the 1st century BC. The Roman province of Dacia included the regions of the Banat, the Oltenia (the West of Wallachia), Transylvania, except its Northern part, as well as a series of fortifications beyond the Carpathian Mountains; moreover, the present Dobrudja was a Roman province starting from the 1st century BC.
The Romanization process also brought about the development of an urban life similar to the whole Roman Empire. New Dacian towns appeared in addition to the old ones. The colonies and the municipalities of Dacia were endowed with edifices and monuments. A wide road network was built. The economic life developed too: the exploitation of gold, iron and salt, the handicrafts and the trade prospered. A century after the conquest of Dacia by the Romans, in Keeping with a decree of the emperor Caracalla, all the free inhabitants of the province became Roman citizens.
The province had to drive back the attacks of the German “barbarians”, since the year 117. They were repeled for a century and a half. Nevertheless, the emperor Aurelian had to quit the province conquered by Trajan, during the period 270-275, in several stages. He preferred to save Gallia, which was also subdeud to the pressure of the German migratory people, during the same period. The evacuation obviously included the army, the administration and the rich landlords, while the rest of the population remained there.
Despite the fact that the Roman Empire had withdrawn from Dacia, the Daco-Roman population, integrated in the structures of the Roman society and speaking the low Latin, preserved these features henceforward. A process of Romanization “by osmosis” of the Dacian population that lived beyond the Roman province took place. The remembrance of Rome did not disappear from the collective memory of those who had been abandoned and of their descendants, who kept the denomination of Rome in their name.
Both the archaeological and certain historical sources confirm the continuity of the Romanized population after the evacuation of Dacia. The new living conditions of the population were certainly hard, because the waves of successive migratory people seriously affected its existence. Nevertheless, the Carpathian-Danubian area was never abandoned; moreover, in the most difficult moments, the mountains and the forests sheltered that area, as the migratory people avoided them. Besides, it can be taken into account the conversion to Christianity of this Romanized population, which took place, in several cases, even before the evacuation of the Roman province. This proces comprised it gradually and entirely since the 4th century. It contributed to lending this population some characteristic features that outlined, for a long time, its differences in comparison with the migratory people, who were Christianized much later and, in general, ‘from the upper strata to the lower ones”, through a decision made by their rulers.
Migrations Age
The migrations followed, one after anather: the Goths, the Huns, the Gepidae, the Avars, the Petchenegs and the Mongols (Tartars). The Slavs, the Cumans, the Hungarians and the Bulgarians had a bigger importance. The Slavs came in sucessive waves sincenthe 6 th century and represented the third component of the new Roman people, the Romanians. The Romanian people were formed starting from two main components, the Daco-Getian and the Roman ones. The Slavs contributed to the ethno genesis process to a lower extent. However, they played a catalyst part.
Other elements were obviously added to these three components, during the migrations centuries. The Romanian people concluded its constitution process by the end of the first millennium, as a result of the abovementioned symbiosis. Since the 9th century, both the historical sources and the archaeological traces reveal the existence of the first political Romanian or Slavo-Romanian structures in the Carpathian-Danubian area.
The Romanian language was submitted to a long evolutionary process, starting from the unrefined Latin spoken by the population abandoned by the legions of the Roman Empire. The process ended by the end of the 1st millennum. This language – without dialects in the space of the ancient Dacia – is formed of a basic lexical stock of 60% of Latin words, to which we have to add the words that come from the Daco-Getic substratum, as well as 15-20% of Slavic words. The words originated during the contacts the Romanians had with other peoples in the course of the centuries were obviously added to this main lexical stock. It is also important to mention that the grammar structure of the Romanian language is Latin and that the Romanian language is a Latin language on the whole.
The Pontic-carpathian-Danubian area represented a space of resistance, and assured the survival of the daco-Romans and their passage towards the new Romanian people that they were to form. It was, at the same time, the area where the migratory peoples, after having crossed the steppes, reached natural barrage of strong mountains and huge forests that at least hindered their moving forward. Certainly, the resistance that the Romanian people in course of formation could oppose them was still limited, while the pace and the violence of these almost successive invasions, hampered, for many centuries, the organization of state structures able to do it.
Establishment of first Romanian State Entities
The Hungarian kingdom completed the conquest of Transylvania during the 13th century, which was progressively achieved and starded since the 11th century. It was during the same period, by the end of the 13 th century, that Litovoi, a Romanian prince, attempted to reach an independent statute towards the Hungarian kingdom, in favor of the Romanian State structure he had created, but he failed in his attempt. It was only during the 14th century that the circumstances allowed the creation of Romanian states, but not in Transylvania, Which was in course of getting its multi-ethnical character. The Hungarians joined the Romanians, as well as the Sicules, in the middle of the country and the Saxon colonists – who were coming mainly from the regions of the Rhine and the Moselle – at least in the South and the East of the Carpathians.
The edification of Wallachia (1330) and, after that, the one of Moldavia (1359) as independent States could occur only when the Mongol power weakened in the area and the Hungarian kingdom changed its dynasty. The dynasty of Arpad’s descendants passed away and the rule of the kingdom by the Anjou family came across difficulties.
The two Romanian principalities that were formed managed to win their independence through the struggle. The first Wallachian prince Basarab defeated the king Charles Robert of Anjou in the battle of Posada. Consequently, the kingdom of Hungary admitted the independence of the principality formed in the South of the Carpathians. The same thing happened to the Moldavian principality founded, in the East of the mountains, by Dragos, who came from the Maramures region. His successors were compelled to yield the power to Bogdan (1359-1365), who, just like Basarab, managed to break off the dependence to the powerful kingdom from the West. The Romanian States could make themselves conspicuous for about half-century, without being submitted to vassalage links. Nevertheless, it is clear that the powerful kingdoms of Poland and Hungary, their neighbors, which also proved expansion tendencies, represented a permanent problem.
Either the Moldavian or the Wallachian princes had to pay their respects and accept to have vassalage relationships with them for a long time. However, the two principalities imposed their full independence, in comparsion with the neighboring Christian kingdoms.
Romania and Ottoman Empire
Moreover, these two Romanian States werw te represent, henceforward, one of the barriers Europe benefited of against the Ottoman Empire. It was Jules Michelet who emphasized the part played by the Romanians in this concern, in their capacity of defending the continent, along with other christian nations of the area. The Wallachian and the Moldavian princes succeeded in strengthening their States in the 14th century. They became kindred to the Serb and the Bulgarian reigning families.
Mircea the Old
The Wallachian throne was bestowed to Mircea cel Batran (Mircea the Old) (1386-1418), a prominent personality who played an important role. He managed to put into practice a skilful balanced policy between Poland and Hungary. While Maintaining his links with the Southern-Danubian States, he joined the European policy of the king’s defenese, then, the one of the emperor Sigismund of luxembourg, as, during the 14th century, the Ottoman Turks had progressively conquered the Balkan Peninsula, submitting it to tdirect domination. In order to continue his expansion policy, the sultan Bajazid invaded Wallachia; a terrible battle took place at Rovine in the year 1394. The Romanians won; on the other hand, the Wallachian prince was obligedto retire to the mountains. He concluded an alliance treaty with the king Sigismund, in Brasov, in 1395. faced with the danger, a crusade project was outlined, under the quidance of the king, Mircea the Old being associated to it. The Christian army was defeated at Nicopole, in 1396. Nevertheless, the prince Mircea managed to resist the Ottoman offensive operations until 1402, when, on the occasion of the battle from Ankara, sultan Bajazid was taken prisoner by Timur Lenk. During the dynastic anarchy period that lasted for years, Mircea the Old developed a very skilful policy with the aim to support either a candidate or another on the ascend to the throne, which allowed him not only to keep his position, but also to make himself conspicuous.
Nevertheless, by the end of Mircea’s reign, Mehmet I re-established the sultan’s authority, whose consequence was, among others, the fact that Wallachia lost lost Dobrudja and the ports of Giurgiu and Turnu, situated on the left bank of the Danube.
Moldavian Princes
The descendants of the prince Bogdan from Moldavia did not face the Ottoman danger from the very beginning, but they had to put into practice a skilful policy of equilibrium between Poland and Hungary. Among them, Petru Musat (Peter Musat the First) and particularly Alexandru cel Bun (Alexander the Good) (1400-1432) became well known as outstanding personalities of the area. Just like Mircea the Old, Alexander the Good encouraged the merchants from the Saxon villages of Transylvania and those of Lvov, granting them commercial privileges.
Romanians in Transylvania
The Romanians were submitted to a confessional discrimination in Transylvania, through the measures adopted by King Louis the Great, who conditioned, by a decree, the belonging to the nobility by the adhesion to the Roman Church. The result was that the Romanian nobles who passed to Catholicism were assimilated amid the Hungarian nobility. Those who refused to do it found themselves amidts the peasantry. This discrimination further deepened after the big peasant rebellion occurred in the year 1437. Afterwards, the Hungarian nobility, the Sicules and the Saxons concluded a pact among them – Unio trium nationum – in keeping with which all of them exclusively assumed the leadership of the principality, their representatives being the only members of the Diet, while the Orthodox Romanians were considered just tolerated.
Hower, the most serious problem the Southern-Eastern Europe on the whole was facing was the military pressure exerted by the Ottoman Empire. A fierce resistance struggle lasted over a century, during which a whole serios of personalities made themselves conspicuous. Even if they reached a compromise solution in the end, this stand favored the Romanians state survival and, at the same time, weakened, for a while, the sultans’ offensive force directed against Central Europe.
After Mircea the Old, who was the first prince to resist the Ottomans, the most important personality starting with the first decade of the 15th century was the Romanian Ion Corvin (john Corvin) (Hunyadi), prince of Transylvania and, later on, governor of Hungary. John Corvin repeledthe Ottoman attacks. At the same time, as he was leading the opposition of the whole area – the Wallachian and the Moldavian princes called him “their father”! – Jon Corvin made inroads beyond the Danube, till the Balkans. Nevertheless, on the occasion of the battle from Varna, occurred in the year 1444, the king of Hungary fell in action; two years later, John Corvin was elected governor of the kingdom. He fell a victim of the pest, on the occasion of the siege of Belgrade that he fiercely defended (1456).
Vlad the Impaler (known also as Dracula)
The Wallachian prince Vlad Dracul (Vlad the Devil) helped Jon Corvin. The former’s son, Vlad Tepes (Vlad the Impaler) (1456-1462) mounted the throne of Wallachia in the year 1456. He was the prince who became the relay racer of the anti-Ottoman resistance after jon Corvin’s
He remained in the collective memory not only of his people, but also of the whole area, as an example of audacity and cruelty as well. He spared no effort in order to stop the sulta’s advance. He refused to pay him the tribute and managed to defeat him in 1462. He fell victim of an interior plot and of the Saxons’ intrigues from Transylvania, to whom he preferred his own merchants, and was imprisoned by the king Mathias of Hungary, John Corvin’s son, for many years. He was set free in the year 1476 and both the king and the prince Stefan cel Mare (Stephen the Great) supported him to ascend the throne of Wallachia again, but he fell in an ambush, a few months later. His death meant, for Wallachia, the adoption of a compromise stand towards the ottomans.
Stephen the great and his Successors
Stefan cel Mare (Stephen the Great) (1457-1504), the prince of Moldavia, was the one who continued the opposition fight. He was a strong personality, whom the Pope called “the Athlete of Christ”. During his long reign, the prince Stephen made himself conspicuous as an administrator and an organizer of his country and as a military head as well. He also developed a very skilful diplomatic activity and knew how to impose his personality to his contemporaries. At the beginning of his reign, he had conflicts with the king Mathias, whom he defeated at Baia, on the occasion of the latter’s inroad on the Moldavian land (1467). By refusing to pay the tribute to the sultan, a fact his predecessor had agreed in the year 1456, Stephen commenced a series of wars against the Ottoman Empire and against the Tartars, its vassals. He won an important victory at Vaslui, in 1475, against an army formed of 120.000 Turks. The following year, he opposed the sultan Mehmet Second himself, whose army pillaged the whole country. Irrespective of that, the prince Stephen could remain on the throne and resume his offensive operations as soon as the Otomans withdrew from the country. His appeals meant to receive the support of Europe practically remained without echo. Two of the most important Moldavian ports and fortresses at the Danube and at the Blak Sea, Chilia and Cetatea Alba, real lungs of the country, were lost in 1484. But this did not prevent the prince from successively defeating the Ottomans in 1485 and 1486. Fracing a difficult situation, Stephen the Great paid his respects to the king Cazimir Fourth of Poland, without however receiving the support he expected. At the end of the 15th century, the prince had the best relationships with the king Mathias of Hungary, but, in 1497, a Polish army reached Moldavia, which Stephen the Great seriously defeated at Codrii Cosminului. At the end of his long reign, the prince came to the conclusion that his country had to reach an agreement with the powerful Ottoman Empire. Owing to the force of circumstances, Moldavia was to apply a compromise solution with the Porte.
But stephen the Great’s reign is not important only due to his acts of bravery, but also because of the capability he proved of assuring the prosperity to a country submitted to the war almost continuously. During his reign, the prince has built strong fortresses, palaces and princely courts, several dozens of monasteries and churches, whose edifices – or at least ruins – still prove the power of the Moldavian State during the reign of this prince. The Romanians’ collective memory kept a special place to this prince. The Romanians fought a fierce resistance struggle, trying to withstand the Ottoman power at the frontiers of Europe. Nevertheless, in the end, Wallachia first, then Moldavia, as well as Transylvania, since the 16 th century, had to agree with the historical compromise solution with the Porte. Being, for the Middle Ages, a real model of bilateral understanding able to assure their survival as States, this compromise also contributed indirectly to the protection of the frontiers of “the other” Europe, by means of these buffer-States. Both wallachia and Moldavia were obliged to accept the suzerainty of the sultan and to pay tribute. But, in this way, the two principalities could preserve their state existence uninterruptedly, being the only ones in the area. The other Christian States of the area, including the powerful kingdoms of Hungary and Poland, had to interrupt their existence, at a certain moment, one after another. They could also maintain their reigning princes and their nobility, as well as defend their faith, as the Ottomans accepted not to build mosques on the Romanian territory. Through their existence itself, these principalities contributed to the delay of the Muslims’ advance towards the centre of the continent.
Since the 16th century, especially since its second half, the Ottomans started not to observe the right of the country to choose its reigning prince any more. Consequently, many times, the Porte used to make direct nominations. Moreover, they were the result of the quota of the amounts that the candidates had paid to it and to its dignitaries. Several outstanding princes were mentioned, peculiarly in Moldavia, during this century. Stephen the Great’s immediate successors, his son Bogdan, his nephew, bearing the same name as his grand-father and his illegitimate son Petru Rares (Peter Rares) made themselves conspicuous as important personalities. We also have to emphasize the Moldavian prince Ion Voda cel Cumplit or cel Viteaz (John the Terrible or the Brave)who heroically tempted to gain the independence from the Ottoman Empire, therefore, not to observe the regime of historical compromise achieved by his predecessors. Nevertheless, the two States could avoid being integrated within the sultans’ Empire and, at the same time, they represented a kind of asylum land for the Christians of the Balkans. They also managed to keep and show their faith. It was the moment when the splendid churches painted on the outer walls were built in Moldavia.
Principality of Transylvania
The battle of Mohacs occurred in 1526, when the king of Hungary fell in action and the Turks’ advance towards the middle of Europe – as the Turks formed the pashalik of Buda in 1541 – led to essential geopolitical modifications. The kingdom of Hungary was shared between the Ottomans and the dynasty of Austria, while Transylvania became a principality submitted to the same rules as the two Romanian principalities situated in the South and the Transylvania principality, the Romanians were risen to the rank of the little nobility. A limited stratum of Romanian nobility at least at its inferior level was thus reconstituted.
Reform in Transylvania
The process of the Reform Comprised Transylvania too. The Hungarians and the Sicules were divided, henceforward, among Catholicism, Calvinism and Unitarianism, while the Saxons entirely adhered to Lutheranism. The Romanians remained faithful to their Orthodox faith, but they also took advantage of the Reform in the cultural field. Books in Romanian were printed, thanks especially to the support of the Saxons, starting with the middle of the 16th century and especially during its second half. A real confessional peace was also achieved in the principality of Transylvania. It was exerted at two levels, the superior one of the four confessions of the political nations – the Catholicism, the Calvinism, the Lutheranism and the Unitarianism – which benefited by the same privileges as the inferior one – and the Orthodox confession of the Romanians, which was only tolerated.
Michael the Brave
At the end of the 16th entury, when the domination of the Porte reached very high dimensions, a fact mirrored by an unbearable increase of the tribute, the Wallachian prince Mihai Viteazul (Michael the Brave) (1593-1601) revolted against it, his rebellion turning into a real independence war. The prince was also the first unifier of the Romanian space. In the year 1595, he defeated the Turks at Calugareni, situated between Bucharest and the Danubian port of Giurgiu. He ceased paying the tribute and his raids beyond the river seriously worried the Ottoman dignitaries, the remembrance of the prince’s Southern-Danubian presence being in fact maintained in the Balkan folklore. Michael the Brave joined a larger system of alliances. He acted since 1594 in alliance with the prince Sigismund Bàthory of Transylvania and the prince Aron of Moldavia, but he relied, in particular, on the suport of the emperor Rudolf Second. However, he developed his own policy.
The unstable prince Sigismund Bathory abandoned his principality in favor of his cousin, the cardinal Andre Bàthory who, parodoxically, had the tendency of concluding a pact with the Ottomans. At that moment, Michael the Brave crossed the mountains. He won the battle of selimbar, near Sibiu and, afterwards, made his solemn entry in Alba Iulia (1599). He also took possession over Moldavia. In the documents of the time, he entitled himself prince of the three countries, which he governed, however, separately. Nevertheless, Michael the Brave incurred the hostility of the nobility of Transylvania who revolted against him and the emperor did not give him the support he expected. The prince lost the battle that opposed him to the nobles of Transylvania allied with the imperial general Basta, at Miraslau, in September 1600. He managed to make an audacious journey to Vienna and Prague, where the emperor Rudolf Second granted him his support, this time. His attitude was caused by the fact that in Transylvania, after the victory of Miraslau, the nobles raised against the imperial general that had suported them and they recalled Sigismund Bàthory. In ed Sigismund Bàthory and the nobles at Gor?sl?u, near Cluj. But, six days later, the imperial general sent a body of soldiers from Wallonia, who assasinated the victorious prince in his tent.
Romanians in the 17th Century
The 17th century pointed out certain prominent personalities. The effect of Michael the Brave’s liberating war was reflected by the Romanian-Ottoman relationships. The authority of the Ottoman Empire was re-established, but the Porte avoided requesting a tribute of the level it had reached during the last decades of the 16th century, before the year 1594. The reign of Matei Basarab (Mathew Basarab) (1632-1654) in Wallachia and that of Vasile Lupu (Vasile the Wolf) (1634-1653) in Moldavia were the most important during the two thirds of the century. The Wallachia prince proved to have been an excellent organizer and he succeeded in increasing the military forces of the country to such a great extent that the Porte tain moment. Vasile the Wolf distinguished himself in particular as a protector of Orthodoxy, by organizing a synod in Jassy, among others. But, at the same time, he had the ambition of submitting Wallachia to his domination, a fact that made him come in conflict with this principality. The two princes were also founders and builders of churches and monasteries.
In Transylvania, the presence of the prince Gabriel Bethlen and that of the princes George Rakoczy First (1630-1648) and George Rakoczy Second (1648-1659), father and son, represented the “European” affirmation of principality.
Transylvania wasinvolved in the thirty years war too. At the same time, tendencies of collaboration and even of alliances among the three principalities were also noticed in that period. Essential transformations took place in Southern-Eastern Europe and in the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic area in the last third of the 17th century. However, the siege of Vienna that failed in a disastrous manner in the year 1683, marked the beginning of the decline of this empire.
Expansion of Austria
The imperial emissaries were present in Transylvania even before the imperial armies had conquered Buda (1686). Negotiations were held, during which the prince Apafy made efforts for being able to keep his principality, but making as few concessions as possible to Vienna. However, the games were made! Caraffa settled at Sibiu in February 1688 and imposed on the Transylvanian states to solemnly give up the sultan’s suzerainty, asking for the imperial protection.
Michael Apafy died in April 1690. His under age son was forced to quit the country six years later. Transylvania was to become a province of the Empire, even if, at a certain moment, the denomination of big principality was granted.
A diploma issued by the emperor leopold established its new statute in the year 1691. Vienna proved to be flexible and skilful. The privileged religions and the regime of religious tolerance, the privileges of the nobility, the municipal saxon right and the legislation of the country were confirmed. The diet was maintained, but its authority and attributions were to be progressively limited. George Banffy was elected governor, while Nicholas Bethlen officiated as chancellor, but the supreme authority was incumbent to the commander of the imperial army. The chancery of the country was established in Vienna.
It is obvious that Vienna, the citadel of Catholicism, disliked the tolerance that had to be proved in respect to the denominational regime that the inhabitants of Transylvania themselves had chosen. That is why Vienna tried to change the balance of denominational forces by attracting the Romanians – who were the majority in the country, from the demographic point of view – towards a union with Rome. This was also designed to be a means of pressure upon the nobility. At the beginning, there were many Romanians who accepted the union, especially that the conditions proposed were tempting for a population that had been only tolerated so far. The emperor issued two diplomas regarding this matter. In the first one, dating from 1699, the united Orthodox clergymen offered a regime that was similar to the one of the privileged religions. In the second one, issued in the year 1701, the united Orthodox believers assured a regime that brought them closer to those of the political nations. The Greek-Catholic bishop was admited in the diet in his capacity as the Romanians’ only representative, but the promises included in the second diploma remained only on the paper. Consequently, after a few decades, the Romanians of Transylvania who had accepted the union massively returned among those who had remained faithful to the Orthodox faith. Nevertheless, since the end of the 17th century, the Romanians of Transylvania were divided between two Churches, the Orthodox and the Greek Catholic one.
Serban Cantacuzino
The serious defeat borne by vizier Kara Mustafa in vienna had also repercussions concerning the princes of Wallachia and Moldavia. The successes scored by the Austrian armies were felt as a liberation promise. Serban Cantacuzino – who had participated in the siege of Vienna, but had bombarded the town with cannon balls filled with straw! – started negotiations with the Empire. At a certain moment, he even hoped for a generalized liberation of the Southern-Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, he suddenly died and no agreement was concluded. Constantin Brancoveanu, who was much more cautious than his uncle, ascended the throne of Wallachia.
Constantin Brancoveanu
First and foremost, Brancoveanu avoided further binding himself towards Austria. He maintained his relations with Vienna, where, as a matter of fact, he deposited important funds (as well as in Venice), but without further pledging himself. In his turn, the emperor strove for maintaining him on his traces, by granting him the title of count and, then, the one of prince of the Empire.
Brancoveanu continued the development work inside the country. He erected palaces the one from Mogosoaia, near Bucharest, proves the artistic level reached by the buildings raised in the age that bears the name of the prince – monasteries and churches. He led a pompous court life and gathered a huge fortune. At the same time, thanks to the important sums of money that he put at the disposal of the Ottoman dignitaries, he could keep his throne. He also had relations with Russia, during the reign of Peter the Great. But, like in the case of the Austrians, he avoided running too many risks in an adventure.Thus, he managed to remain on the throne till the year 1714. His end, due to the Ottoman dignitaries’ greediness, attracted by his immense fortune, but also to the plots of his close relatives, the Cantacuzino family, was a tragic one. Being dismissed and taken to Constantinople, tortured in order to confess his concealed fortune, he was executed, after his four sons had been killed in front of him and after he had refused to abandon his faith and to be converted to Islam. The Orthodox Church sanctified him, taking into account the force of his sacrifice.
Dimitrie Cantemir
Constantin Cantemir, the reigning prince of Moldavia was Serban Cantacuzino’s contemporary and also that of Brancoveanu, for several years. He was a soldier, above all, but one of his sons, Dimitrie, was to become one of the most important men of letters of Europe; as a matter of fact, his name was to be found on the frontispiece of the Sainte Geneviève Library in Paris. Dimitrie Cantemir spent long years in Constantinople as a hostage. He learnt the turkish language and adjusted to the every-day kife of the Ottoman Empire. Cantemir devoted his scientific activity to the study of the history, the religion and music. At the same time, the Ottoman dignitaries held him in respect and he gained credit with them. Thus, the Porte sent him to Moldavia as a reigning prince, in the year 1710. But, in Constantinople, Cantemir made friends with Tolstoy, the representative of the czar Peter the Great and, as soon as he arrived to Jassy, he started preparing the liberation action of his country. In the spring of 1711, his representative concluded a treaty in keeping with which the czar accepted that Moldavia would become a principality reigned by the Cantemir dynasty. The treaty also stipulated that the frontier of the country would be the Dniester River and that the fortresses situated on its bank, taken by the Turks, would be yielded to him (the fortresses from Akkerman and Bender). In keeping with that treaty, the czar Peter arrived to Moldavia with his army, but with insufficient forces. The allied forces were surrounded by the Ottomans’ much more numerous army at Stanilesti. It was only thanks to the money the big vizier was offered that he allowed the czar Peter and Cantemir to withdraw. Cantemir was to end his life in Russia.
Fanariot Princes
The Ottoman Empire took the decision of applying another system in the area, due to the advance of the Austrian Empire up to the Carpathian Mountains, to the Offensive actions and plans of the Empire take this decision were the involvement of Moldavia in the operation achieved by Peter the Great in the year 1711 and the similar tendencies existing in wallachia. The Turks made appeal to the Fanariot princes henceforward. The sultan had replaced the Byzantine emperor in the year 1453, but an Orthodox patriarchate continued to exist in Costantinople and those who had been the masters gathered around this patriarchate. A cast of dignitaries of the patriarchate was formed in the Fanar district of Constantinople, which also managed to reach the tructures of the Ottoman Empire.
The attention of the Greek elites, particularly those of Constantinople was also directed towards the Romanian principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, which were rich and, moreover, benefited by an autonomy statute. Many Greeks found there the possibility of developing a commercial activity independent of the Ottoman interference and also the one of playing a political part in these countries where the Porte was not exerting its direct domination. They also penetrated among the autochthonous boyars, often by means of marriage. The new situation that had appeared made the Turks try to consolidate their positions by intensifying their control and domination in the two Romanian princes from the thrones of Bucharest and Jassy and to replace them by Fanariot princes. This is how the Fanariot system appeared in Moldavia and in Wallachia, where it was settled in the year 1711 and, respectively, 1716 and lasted till the year 1821. This time, it did not come to princes being Greek by accident or having a Greek kindred, as the Turks gave the “monopoly” of the thrones of the Romanian Principalities to the Fanariot princes, or, in other words, to a certain number of families belonging to the elite of Fanar. As a matter of fact, in order to be able to mount the thrones of Jassy and Bucharest, two Romanian families – Racovita and Callimachi – had to identifi themselves in the Fanariot environment too, because, otherprinces did not come alone to Bucharest, two Romanian families – Racovita and Callimachi – had to identify themwise, they risked being unable to keep their positions. The princes did not come alone to Bucharest or to Jassy, but accompanied by numerous suites, by their parents in the first place and also by the creditors who had advanced them the necessary money for getting the throne. It was a real invasion! 31 princes belonging to eleven familiers, among whom the two above-mentioned, reigned in all, in the two principalities.
However, they depended on the mercy or even the freaks of their Ottoman masters, as the domination of the Porte had visibly increased. In order to get more important sums of money and also to create a feeling of instability to the Fanariot princes and to keep them more at their mercy, the Ottomans used to often change the princes from a country to another (that is why Constantin Mavrocordat reigned ten times!). Many times, they were also exiled or even executed; among the 31 above-mentioned princes, 7 lost their life by a violent death, while others were executed even in their court of Bucharest or jassy. The struggle aiming at ascending the throne was tough, even merciless sometimes, and this happened even among kindred candidates!
The Fanariot period was characterized by an excessive taxation system. This taxation policy was motivated by the Ottoman exigencies, as well as by the reigning princes’ unstable situation, who tried to increase their fortune as fast as possible.
The corruption and the abuses, especially towards a peasantry that was at the mercy of the system, also conferred a negative image to this period. However, we have to add that certain Fanariot princes – all of them being well cultivated men, generally speaking – were little “enlightened despots” and reformers, trying to organize and “modernize” the society. Among the last ones, we have to nominate Constantin Mavrocordat, whose “Constitution” was published in the year 1742 in Le Mercurede France magazine and who, among others, put an end to serfdom, turning the peasants into forced labors. It is also worth mentioning Grigore Ghica and Alexandru Ipsilanti (Alexander Ipsilanti). The Fanariot princes also contributed to a great extent to the intensification of the institutional links between the two countries, which was also due to the alternative reigns in one or the other of the principalities.
Russian-Austrian-Turkish Wars
Austria and especially Russia started wars against the Ottoman Empire, many times during the 18th century and the first decades of the 19th century. The Romanians also suffered serious material losses and casualties without these wars to be theirs!
The periods of Austrian occupation and especially those of Russian occupation also represented an opportunity for the Moldavian and the Wallachian elites to come into contact and even to acquaint themselves with the ideology of the Enlightenment, by means of the Russian and Austrian officers. Nevertheless, Moldavia had serious territorial losses.
The Porte yielded the Northern Moldavia (Bukovina) to Austria in the year 1775 and Bassarabia, a territory situated between the Prut and the Dniester Rivers, to Russia, in the year 1812.
Romanians’ National Awakening
The beginnings of a “modern national awakening” of the Romanians occurred in the second half of the 18th century.
The united Orthodox men of letters from Transylvania played an important part in this respect. They could achieve their studies in Buda and Vienna and particularly in Rome. The Romanians’ permanent consciousness regarding their Roman roots went on increasing during that period. The passive attitude was replaced by a modern national consciousness, which further gradually developed, during a whole century, till the middle of the 19th century and which characterized all the Romanians living on this side and on the other side of the Carpathian Mountains. This feeling was specific to the elites, to the middle strata and to the peasantry as well. This consciousness also appeared under the modernizing influences of the Englightenment and those of the French Revolution.
The big Wallachian boyar Ion Cantacuzino (John Cantacuzino) elaborated the draft of an aristocratic-democratic republic, at the beginning of the 10th decade of the 18th century, which mirrored the obvious influences of the Parliamentary English regime and those of the French Revolution as well. It was also at that time that a conservative boyar was complaining about some young boyars who read “French novels” and who proclaimed themselves disciples of Rousseau and especially of Voltaire.
The Wallachian and the Moldavian boyars delivered memoirs to the first consul and, afterwards, to the emperor Napoleon, at the beginning of the 19th century, hoping that the latter would offer their country the chance of being liberated, but this did not happen. The Tomanian issue was not raised for discussion at the Vienna Congress.
Nevertheless, it was the period of the beginning of the historical process that was to lead to the edification of Romania., the modern National State of the Romanians. In fact, The edification process of the Modern State was, at the same time, stage of European integration for the Romanians. The fact that they preserved the language, like on an ethnical island, along the centuries, as well as the consciousness of their origin and their unity was almost a miracle. It was at that moment that the modern national consciousness took shape starting from these premises. It represented the basis for Romania’s edification – process that was equally intricate, taking into account that Romania was under the impact and the influence of three empires of the area, which were not too willing to favor it!
Revolution of 1821
A Wallachian revolution headed by Tudor Vladimirescu was partially superposed on the insurrection of the Greek Hetaerists that took place in the Romanian Principalities too, in the year 1821. The breaking out of the Wallachian revolution headed by Tudor Vladimirescu was the Romanians’ awakening signal. This revolution was supposed to be initially directed against the Ottoman Empire. Vladimirescu had hoped that a new Russian-turkish war would have broken out, which would have enabled him to get the liberation of his country. He had concluded an agreement with the most important boyars, who had promised to support him, and another agreement with the military chiefs of the Hetaeria. Despite that, Vladimirescu aimed at reaching out also modernizing social-political aims. Among his objectives, we can mention the settlement of a new international statute of the country through the liberation from the Ottoman domination. The Ottoman domination was not supposed to be replaced by the Russian one. Other stipulations of his program referred to the existence of close relations with Moldavia, taking into account the links existing between the two countries, the creation of a national army, the adoption of measures aiming at putting an end or at least limiting the also included other ideas concerning the social-political promotion based on merits, not on fortune or origin, the decrease and the reform of the taxation system, the development of the primary education by using the incomes of the monasteries etc. The revolution began in the Oltenia region, in the month of January 1821.
The prince Ipsilanti, the chief of the hetaeria movement, reached Moldavia in his turn, in february, accompanied by his army coming from Russia, whose support he invoked. Then, Vladimirescu crossed the Olt River and directed his steps towards Bucharest, which he took possession of (March 1821). Irrespective of a certain initial complicity of the Russian authorities, at least with the prince Ipsilanti, the czar Alexander First realized, at the Laybach Congress, that he was obliged to disapprove the two movements and thus blamed them, observing the principles of the Saint Alliance. As to Vladimirescu, he commenced a negotiation process with the pashas from the line of the Danube, considering the new ituation that had appeared. During a stormy meeting he had with Ipsilanti, he blamed the latter’s imprudence and his mischievous propaganda as concerns the possible support the czar had promised him. Nevertheless, the negotiations with the Turks contributed only to the delay of the invasion of the Principalities, but did not manage to avoid it. This happened particularly because Vladimirescu refused to agree, during his negotiations with the Turks, with their demand referring to the support he was supposed to grant to their operations against Ipsilanti’s army. On the 15th /27th of May 1821, Vladimirescu and his “people’s assembly” – denomination he had given to his army – was withdrawing from Bucharest and was making to the Oltenia region, when the Ottoman army approached.
He intended to hold out there, in the fortified monasteries from the North, hoping that Russia and even Austria would interfere in order to stop the Ottoman operation in the Principalities. But Vladimirescu fell a victim to a plot, while he was withdrawing. His army continued to retire towards Oltenia, forced the crossing of the Olt River and won a battle against the Ottomans at Dragasani, on 29th –30th of May / 10th –11th of June. Afterwards, most of the members of the “people’s assembly” spread, returning to their villages, wile the rest of them directed their steps towards the monasteries, where they continued their resistance. On the contrary, the Hetaerist army was to be destroyed in the battle fought by the Ottomans at Dragasani too, on the 7th /19th of June 1821.
Region of Autochthonous Princes
The Principalities were submitted to the Ottoman occupation. However, the Porte did not trust the Fanariot princes any more. The occupation was extended for over a year before the new reigning princes could ascend the thrones of Bucharest and Jassy. In spring 1822, two boyar delegations, a Moldavian and a vallachian one, were convoked to Constantinople. The big boyars Grigore Ghica in Wallachia and Ion Alexandru Sturza in Moldavia were designated to mount the thrones, as they took part in the two delegations.
The reign of the princes Ghica and Sturza took place in very difficult circumstances. First and foremost, the Ottoman dignitaries tried to take advantage of the events and to intensify the domination of the Porte. Furthermore, when the princes arrived to the country, they found the occupation body of troops.
Nevertheless, the reigns of the autochthonous princes marked the beginning of the process that was to finally lead to the edification of the national Romanian State. However, the circumstances were most difficult. The material means the reigning princes could have at their disposal were limited and besides, a state of social-political effervescence was still reigning. This ebullience state had also its positive side, as the feeling that a renewal and the reforms were required tended to become general in the society. On the contrary, the concrete achievements of the two princes were relatively modest, taking into account the fact that their reign was rather short, that it partially took place in the presence of a corps and mainly, that the means they disposed of were limited.
Organic Regulations
The Russian armies reached again the Principalities in spring 1828. The two princes had to give up reigning. The prince Sturza was even sent in exile in Ukraine for a while. A long occupation was to begin. The inhabitants were submitted to tough indebtedness in order to assure the food supply of the Russian army operating in the South of the Danube.
Fortunately, the war finished in September 1829, when the Adrianople peace treaty was signed. This peace had a peculiar importance for the Romanians’ destinies. The relationships that existed between Moldavia and Wallachia, on the one hand, and the Ottoman Empire, on the other hand, weakened. The monopoly right that the Porte exerted on the main products was cancelled and, at the same time, the Prncipalities were included in the international economic circulation. The Ottoman Empire had to restore to Wallachia the three harbors on the Danube – Turnu Magurele, Giurgiu and Braila – that the Porte had occupied on the left bank of the river in the 15th and 16th centuries.
But the Russian army had to extend its occupation till 1834, the moment when the Porte would have paid the war damages. The interference right of Russia was practically turned into a protection reght and the modern reorganization of the two countries was achieved under its strict control. The generals Pahlen and Jeltuhin assured the governing of Moldavia and Wallachia during the war. Afterwards, general Paul kisseleff was to govern the Principalities with a steady hand for a half-decade.
Two sub-commissions reunited in Bucharest elaborated, under his supervision, the two versions of the organic Regulations, which were almost identical and were meant to contribute to the modernization of the two countries. He also encouraged giving up the Oriental customs and adopting the “European” fashion, sending the young boyars in the Universities of the West, as well as recreating a national army in every principality. He tried to limit the exploitation of the forced labor peasants by the landlords, having in view the necessity of increasing the agricultural production. He aimed, however, at annexing the Principalities by Russia and at integrating them in the empire.
The organic regulations brought in a modern organization and a certain separation of the public powers. The executive power was supposed to be exerted by a reigning prince – elected for life by an extraordinary general assembly – assisted by an administrative council formed of several ministers. The legislative power was incumbent to a general assembly; however, both the electors and the elected belonged to the class of the boyars. Only the extraordinary general assembly, convoked on the occasion of the reigning prince’s election, also included deputies representing the middle strata.
The judicial power mirrored a modern organization of the instances (law-cours, courts of appeal, supreme courts). The Organic Regulations also stipulated the creation of a corps of lawyers, as well as the prosecutors’ institution and organized the public finances and the taxation system by simplifying it (the latter was based, at that time, on the individual tax and the tax paid by the merchants). It also established the reigning prince’s fixed civil list, created the civil state and the public archives, organized the country and the commune administration, took measures aiming at developing the education system and achieved a legislative and institutional strengthening of the relations between the two countries. A chapter regulated the relations between landlords and forced labor peasants, taking into account mainly the interests of the former and expressing the necessity of a massive increase of the cereal production, having in view the integration of the Principalities in the world economic circulation. The renewal of the national army was also achieved, but general Kisseleff took care of including a quite important number of Russian officers among the commanders.
In the year 1834, the suzerain power and the protecting one decided to designate themselves the new reigning princes, without taking into account the stipulations of the Organic Regulations. Mihail Sturza (Michael Sturza) mounted the throne in Moldavia and Alexandru ghica, brother of the preceding reigning prince, ascended the throne in Wallachia.
Their reigns represented a period of progress and modernization that was possible to be achieved under the strict supervision of the representatives of the protecting power.
A national movement – opposed to the regime set up by the Organic Regulations, in other words, opposed to the Russian interference and to the monopolizing of thepower by the big conservative boyars – became ampler. This movement acted in this concern in the cultural fields (particularly in theatre and press), but also in the political field; secret movements and societies also appeared.
Revolution of 1848
This revolution covered almost the whole Romanian space – Wallachia, Moldavia and Transyivania. In Moldavia, the proximity of the Russian frontier contributed to the limitation of the revolutionary events to the dimensions of a protesting movement, suppressed by the reigning prince Sturza.On the contrary, in Wallachia, a revolutionary regime managed to be set up, a big number of young Romanians attending it. It was a regime that was formed according to the model of the revolution of February in Paris. It succeeded in remaining in the office over three months (9th of June – 13th of September) and enjoyed a large popular support. After having admitted the new state of things in Wallachia, under the pressure of the government of Saint Petersburg, the Ottoman Porte suppressed by force the wallachian revolutionary regime. Finally, the events became more intricate in Transylvania, due to the contradictions with a national character that brought about a civil war between romanians and Hungarians, which lasted from October 1848 till summer 1849. At that moment, ‘a pacifying project” was concluded thanks to the efforts of the Wallachian revolutionary Bicolae Balcescu Unfortunately, the massive suppressing interferance of Austria and Russia put an end to the revolutionary process in the centre of Europe, in August 1849.
During the revolution of 1848, the links among the Romanians of the various countries became stronger and theedification process of the modern Romanian nation was accomplished. The revolutionary programs represented the unitary features of the revolutionary process and we could talk about an edification program of the modern natonal Romanian State, as the main heritage of the revolution.
The Ottoman and the Russian armies occuoied the Romanian Principalities. At the beginning of the summer of 1849, the two powers proceeded again to the denomination of the reigning princes, avoiding an electoral process, through the Balta Liman convention. The new princes – designated only for a period of seven years – were Grigore Ghica in Moldavia and Barbu Stirbei in Wallachia. Except the period of 1851-1853, their reigns took place under foreign occupation, first a Turkish-Russian occupation, then a Russian one and, finally, an Austrian-Ottoman occupation, starting with the year 1854. This fact was to a great extent an obstacle in the way of any real progress of the two countries, despite the fact that Ghica proved to have liberal ideas and that Stirbei proved to have aptitudes in the field of the institutional development.
War of Crimea
The war of Crimea (1853-1856) was to contribute to the appearance of essential changes. After the revolution of 1848, one of its main consequences was the development of a powerful unionist movement in Moldavia and Wallachia. This movement was also supported from abroad by the tireless activity of some dozens of exiled leaders of the 1848 revolution who managed to give an international dimension to the Romanian issue.
Paris Congress (1856)
The Paris Congress focused on the Romanian issue. By means of the Paris treaty, Moldavia and Wallachia were submitted to the collective guarantee of the seven greatpowers, while the exclusive protectorate of Russia upon them was cancelled. The internationalization of the Danube and the restitution of the South of Bessarabia to Moldavia represented other decisions adopted by the Congress in favor of the Romanians. On the contrary, the big powers did not manage to reach an agreement concerning the problem of the union of the Principalities, as the Ottoman Empire and Austria were against it. However, a compromise solution was reached: a decision in this respect was postponed.
An informative commission of the guaranteeing Powers was formed with that end in view and the ad hoc Divans were convoked in Bucharest and Jassy, in order to express the Romanians’ wishes. The two ad hoc Divans adopted the unionist program (October 1857). It was unanimously adopted in Wallachia and with only two votes con in moldavia. The unionist program stipulated the following principles: union, responsible government, assembly elected on a large electoral basis, foreing reigning prince, neutrality. In their turn, the commissaries of the seven Powers made up their report in May 1858.
Paris Conference (1858)
The Conference of the guaranteeing Powers, reunited in Paris during the summer of 1858, looked for a compromise solution. The two countries were called the United-Principalities but their sepatation was maintained (two reigning princes, two governments, two assemblies and two administrations). Nevertheless, two common institutions ere created as a result of the Paris Convention, held on the 7th /19th of August: a Court of Cassation and a Central Commission with a legislative character. The citizens of the two countries were also authorized to be able to hold public functions either in one or the other of the principalities, with no difference. The monopolies, the nobility ranks and privileges were abolished and the achievement of an agricultural reform was imperiously recommended. The separation of the public powers was more clearly stipulated, but the electoral stipulations enclosed to the Convention limited the number of electors in the two countries to several billions of people, a fact that was to hinder the reform process.
Union of Principalities
The fundamental desire of the Romanian nation was thus ignored. The Romanians themselves were to give the solution to this issue. The elective Assembly of Jassy elected the colonel Alexandru Ioan Cuza as the reigning prince of Moldavia, on the 5th /17th of January 1859 and, a few weeks later he was elected the reigning prince of Wallachia too – 24th of January. It is through that double election, through that personal union, that the Romanians put the guaranteeing powers in front of an accomplished fact.
Prince Cuza’s Reign
The prince proved to be energetic. He obtained, through insistences and statements, the agreement of the Powers concerning the administrative and political union of the Principalities. The Constantinople Conference of the representatives of the guaranteeing Powers (September 1861) complimed with this wish of the prince, but on the condition that this union achieved by the two countries should be valid only during his reign. Romania existed henceforward as a unitary State.
Prince Cuza’s reign was also a period of reforms in all fields. The modernization was much intensified. Among these reforms we have to mention the one of the army, that of the administration, of the justice and the one of the education. It was also during Cuza’s reign, in 1860 and, respectively 1864, that the universities of Jassy and Bucharest were founded. Another important measure was the secularization of the assets of the Church – first of all, the estates devoted to the Saint Places – through which the State retrieved about a quarter of the national territory. However, the prince had to solve the agrarian problem through a coup d’etat and through the modification of the electoral law. Cuza enacted the agrarian reform in August 1864, in keeping with which about 450. 000 families of forced labor peasants were exempted from their indebtedness towards the landlords and received the pieces of land as their own property.
Charles First’s Reign
The prince was forced to abdicate on the 11th /23rd of February 1866, as the result of a plot. Complying with the requests of the ad hoc Assemblies of the year 1857, the princely Ad-Interim Rulers proclaimed Philips of Flanders as a reigning prince, but he refused. The union of the Principalities was in danger, as the neighboring empires claimed its breaking up. The intercession of france was beneficial, as it rejected the military occupation projects and brought about the reunion of a new Conference of the guaranteeing Powers, in Paris. A new candidate to the throne was found at Sigmaringen. He was the young prince called Carol of Hohenzollern, belonging to the Catholic branch of the family.
Moreover, he was kindred to the emperor napoleon The Third. A plebiscite approved this candidature in the country, the prince himself was persuaded and the chancellor Bismarck encouraged him to accept it. As the problem that faced the guaranteeing powers was an accomplished fact, they finally agreed with it. The Ottoman Empire was the last power to yield to it, but it finally made it too in October 1866.
The reign of the prince – and, since 1881, that of the King Carol Ist was long and beneficial for the country. The modernization process was intensified. The building of railways contributed to the economic progress and to the European integration of the country. A law aiming at encouraging the development of industry was adopted in the year 1887.The oil extraction spectacularly increased. On the eve of First World War, Romania was the fourth oil producer (after the United States, Russia and Mexico). Important progresses were also achieved in the cultural field. The Literary Romanian Society was created in 1866. It became the Academic Romanian Society in 1867 and, finally, the Romanian Academy in 1879.
Independent Romania
The insurrections occurred in Bosnia and in Herzegovina, in the summer of 1875, brought back the Oriental problem in the forefront. Romania initially adopted a neutral position, but, due to the fact that the Ottoman government concerning the possibility of reaching a solution by means of an agreement on the independence issue, Romania started negotiations with Russia. It concluded a convention with Russia on the 4th /16th of April 1877, which allowed the passage of the Russian army across Romania, in case of war against the Ottoman Empire, while Russia guaranteed the integrity of the Romanian territory.
The Russian-Turkish war began on 12th /24th of April 1877. The Romanian divisions were aligned along the Danube, protecting the country from an Ottoman invasion, but also allowing the passage and the regrouping of the Russian army, which lasted about two months.
The Romanian Parliament declared the state of war on 29th of April/10th of May and proclaimed the independence of the country on 9th /21st of May. The military Romanian collaboration was insistently solicited by the Russian commandment in July, after the defeats borne by the Russian army at Plevna and the prince Charles was entrusted with the command of the Romanian and russian diovisions that operated near Plevna.
It was only at the beginning of winter that the besieged Ottoman army tried to force the Russian-Romanian encircling and, as it did not manage to do it, it had to surrender. The war ended, as the advance of the Russian troops towards Constantinople made the Ottoman Empire solicit the conclusion of the truce.
The San-Stefano Russian-Ottoman peace talks led to the acknowledgement of the independence of Romania, as well as that of Serbia and Montenegro. However, Russia imposed to Romania, its ally, to concede it the South of Bassarabia that had been returned to Moldavia in 1856. Romania rejected this conceding. Austria-Hungary and Great Britain proved also their dissatisfaction with the stipulations of San-Stefano agreement. Thus, the Berlin Congress was held (1st /13th of June-1st/13th of July 1878), where the seven Powers reconfirmed the independence of Romania, but stipulating that Romania would concede the South of Bessarabia to Russia. Romania was granted the possesionof Dobrudja. Three years after the acknowledgement of the independence of Romania, the reigning prince took the title of king.
Romania and World War I
Romania also participated in the second Balkan war, in the year 1913. The representatives of the Balkan countries negotiated and signed the peace treaty in Bucharest. It was a peace achieved by the concerned countries without the interference of the Great Powers.
At the beginning of World War I, Romania was still a member of the Triple Alliance it had adhered to in thr year 1883.
However, its national interests oriented it more and more towards the Entente, as, the provinces with a Romanian majority, submitted to the domination of Austria-Hungary, were situated beyond the frontiers of the Romanian State.
Thus, the crown Council held in Sinaia decided the adoption of a neutral position. This neutrality position was maintained till the autumn of 1914, after the death of king Charles First and the accession to the throne of the king Ferdinand, his nephew. However, little by little, it became obvious that Romania was to interfere on the side of the Entente.
Romania concluded a secret treaty with the powers of the Entente in August 1916 and, afterwards, it entered the war on 14th - 27th of August. After a victorious offensive operation in Transylvania, as it was isolated from its Western allies and did not receive the expected military help, the Romanian army was facing a very difficult situation and was obliged to withdraw to Moldavia, evacuating Bucharest too. Despite that, its resistance continued, the army was formed again thanks to the assistance of a French military mission and obtained the victories from marasti and Marasesti, in the summer of 1917. But the defeat of the Russian army, turned into a Bolshevik one, led Romania, completely isolated from its Allies, to the conclusion of an armistice and of a separate peace in Draconian terms. Nevertheless, Romania took up arms again, a few days before the end of the war and the truce of 11th of November 1918 found it in this situation.
Great Romania
The Romanian state unity was achieved in the course of the year 1918. The Council of the Country of Kishinev decided, with a large majority, the union of Bessarabia with Romania, on 27th of March - 9th of April. The state of national effervescence spread in Transylvania and in Bukovina in autumn, on the occasion of the decomposition process of Austria-Hungary. The general Congress of Chernautzi decided the union of Bukovina with Romania, on 15th - 28th of November. The state Romanian unity was achieved on 18th of November - 1st of December, when the great assembly of the Romanians of Alba Iulia decided the union of Transylvania and the Banat with the Romanian kingdom.
Romania contributed to the defense of Europe from the Bolshevik danger in 1919, its army protecting the frontier of Dniester and vanquishing afterwards Bela Kun’s regime from Hungary. It also attended the Peace Conference that ratified, through the treaties of Saint-Germain and trianon, the new frontiers that were already taken into possession by the Romanian State.
Great Romania was now a reality; however, the problems the country was facing were far from being easy. The institutional unification was to be achieved, taking into account, above all, the unitary structures that the Romanian State hadfor over a half-century, but also the differences of each new province.The country was also to be adjusted to the new social-political situation in Europe. The promises that the king and the liberal government had made to the soldiers, during the war, concerning a new and intensive agrarian reform and the universal franchise, were also to be achieved. Furthermore, the economy that was in a precarious state after the war had to be revived at the level of the whole country, whose surface and population had substantially increased.
Great Romania proved its vitality and capabilities. The universal franchise was granted; the most important agrarian reform in the history of the country was achieved (6.000.000 ha distributed); the new Constitution was adopted in the year 1923, whose elaboration had been imposed by the evolution and the development of the country. The economy managed to function normally again after a half-decade. The world crisis of the year 1929 obviously affected Romania too, despite that, on the eve of World War II, the country reached the highest level of its economic development. As to its foreing policy, Romania, as a middle State of the continent, was the ally of France and Poland, as well as the member of two regional alliances: the Small Entente and the Balkan entente. Nicolae Titulescu, the most important foreign affairs minister of Romania, was elected as chairman of the Society of Nations two times in a row.
Romania and World War II
The consequences of World War II were tragic for Romania. It successively lost Bessarabia and Northern bukovina, Northern Transylvania and Southern Dobrudja in the year 1940, after the defeat of France. The king Charles Second (1930-1940) had to abdicate, yielding the throne to his son Mihai, but the power was taken over by the marshal Antonescu, who relied on the legionary movement in a first phase and, afterwards, set up his military dictatorship.
Romania entered the war on the side of Germany in the year 1941, in order to retrieve the provinces that had been taken to it by the Soviet Union. It detached itself fromgermany in August 1944 and Antonescu was arrested by order of the king Michael. During the last phase of the war, the Romanian army participated in the military operations against the Hitlerian army from Transylvania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Austria. Romania recuperated Northern Transylvania in the spring of 1945, a fact that was afterwards confirmed by the Paris peace treaty of 1947.
Soviet Domination
But Romania was placed in the influence sphere of the Soviet Union and was to remain in this situation for over four decades. The political parties were practically broken up and the political power was exerted only by the Communist Party – and by its allies – led from Moscow. The king Michael had to abdicate and to leave for exile in December 1947. A popular republic replaced the monarchy. The totalitarian Communist dictatorship was set up under the guidance of Gheorghe Gheorghiu-dej, the general secretary of the party. The factories, the banks, the enterprises in general, the estates, as well as a big part of the houses were nationalized, while the peasanty was obliged to accept the collectivization. In parallel with the social-economic transformations, also mirrored by the intensive development of industry, mainly the heavy one, the entire country was submited to a repressive campaign. This repression was materialized by hundreds of thousand of arrests, whose victims were the opponents of the new regime, as well as the former landlords, the former ministers since 1919, “the bourgeois “, the wealthy peasantryetc. This repressive campaign was extremely tough until Stalin’s death and was obviously led by Moscow. Nevertheless, it ended, in its mass dimensions, only in the year 1964, a moment when the communist Romanian Party proclaimed an independence position, as it did not acknowledge any leading centre of the international Communist movement any more.
Communist Dictatorship
Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej died in the year 1965. Nicolae Ceausescu replaced him. He continued his political line in the international plan. He even enjoved certain popularity, in a first phase, particularly when he took a categorical stand against the Soviet invasion in Czechoslovakia, in the year 1968. However, starting with the years ’70, he increased more and more his “Communist Orthodoxy”, while standing his ground of “independence” towards the Soviets. The economic problems Romania was facing by the years ’80 became more intricate. Being led by the fixed idea of paying the foreing debts of the country as soon as possible, being also under the harmful influence of his wife, Ceausescu subitted the Romanian people to inconceivable restrictions for about a decade, exerting, at the same time, an absurd dictatorship.
December ’89 and Consequences
Ceausescu’s regime was overthrown in December 1989 by the popular rebellion that turned into a national revolution of an extraordinary ampleness. The dictator was brought to trial by a revolutionary law-court and executed. A program was adopted on the 22nd of December, which stipulated the passage to a political pluralism system, to the free market, to the full liberty in all the fields. Since then, Romania, where the Communist system was the toughest among all the countries of the East, has been facing a difficult transition period.
The political pluralism was set up and was mirrored by the free elections held in 1990, 1992 and 1996. Liberty has also fully come into its own. On the contrary, the economic field still raises unsolvable problems that negatively influence, on the whole, the development and the reconstruction of Romania .Nevertheless, there are still hopes that the difficult situation will be overcome and that the country will regain the part it played and the positions it held during the inter-war period!
|
