Ciprian NIŢULESCU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0017

Abstract: The cleansing of the entire diplomatic and administrative personnel of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Romanian Kingdom in the second half of 1947 involved the creation of a new profile of the Romanian diplomat during the following years, in an era of the global Cold War, when the Romanian diplomatic corps was led by the communist leader Ana Pauker. Besides the new wave of diplomats of working origin (in an age of “class struggle” and of the primordial role of the One-Party-State), the study presents, as exceptions, diplomats from the Antonescu era, who remained in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs after November 1947, important intellectuals of the interwar Romania, holding positions of plenipotentiary ministers of the new Romanian Popular Republic, several among from the first members of the Romanian Communist Party, employed with the ministry in 1946, beside representatives of the Diplomatic Corps from 1947-1952 (to whom we added also the heads of Economic Agencies attached to the diplomatic offices of those years), grouped by the areas of higher education, inclusively PhD, completed by them actually during the years of the Romanian Kingdom. The study points out that, unlike in the previous decades, during the Pauker period of the ministry, many representatives of national minorities (especially Jews), many women were hired in the Diplomatic Corps, but also representatives of some professions, such as physicians, which were not, as a rule, previously accepted. That being also a historical period of contact between two politicalsocial regimes, we should notice that, unlike in the subsequent communist decades, there were in the ministry, people coming from the bourgeoisie. Even if that was a Stalinist portion of the Romanian history, most of the diplomats presented not being any longer among the ministry personnel during the national-communism years after 1963, however, some representatives of Ana Pauker’s entourage from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, such as Corneliu Bogdan and Radu Comsa, resumed their career, holding important positions in the Romanian Diplomatic Corps after 22 December 1989.

Keywords: The Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ana Pauker; diplomatic personnel; Stalinism.

Vasile UNGUREANU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0016

Abstract: Alexandru Paleologu (March 14, 1919, Bucharest – September 2, 2005, Bucharest) was a very well-known Romanian public figure, especially for his work as a writer, essayist and literary critic, but also as a politician and former ambassador of Romania in Paris during the first months of 1990. His appointment as ambassador was a political one, since Alexandru Paleologu was not a career diplomat at that time. Less well known is the fact that Alexandru Paleologu was a career diplomat between August 1, 1946 and November 20, 1947.

Keywords: Alexandru Paleologu; France; diplomat; ambassador; communism.

Daniela POPESCU

https://doi.org/10.47743/asui-2023-0015

Abstract: The Romanian mid1930s faced a startling increase of the number of those who embraced various forms and ideas of extremist discourse. It was also the case for various members of the main German-speaking groups in Romania who embraced the ideology of National Socialism promoted by the German Nazis. The Germans from Romania had their political and institutional representation, local dynamic press, schools, business and were in touch with the news and with the current events and trends from the Reich. Yet only a part of this large ethnic group embraced Reichs path. The German Ethnic Group in Romania (G.E.G.) functioned as an organizational structure which had several interconnected offices such as the Administrative Office, the Legal Office, the Office for Statistics and Population, the Office for Education or the Press and Propaganda Office. The Schulamt (The Office for Education) was in charge not only with the educational curricula but also with administrating the German schools starting with 1940. One of the aims of this paper is to offer a better understanding of the administrative structures of the German Ethnic Group in Romania, particularly the educational branches in charge with educating young members of the German community in Romania and their teachers in the Reichs principles, ideas, and spirit.

Keywords: The German Ethnic Group in Romania; education; schools; propaganda.

Ionel DOCTORU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0014

Abstract: After the end of the Great War and the Great Union of Alba-Iulia, the Romanian authorities felt that Romania needed to play a more important role on the international stage. Underlying this will was the Romanians’ intention to strengthen relations with France, the main winner of the great world war that had just ended and the epicentre of European diplomacy in the new international context. Thus, the Romanian government had sent to the banks of the Seine career diplomats of prestige and experience, such as Victor Antonescu and Constantin Diamandi, in order to properly resolve all the differences that existed between the two countries and to create, in the future, the path towards new ways of collaboration. The promotion of the Polish legation in Paris to the level of embassy in the autumn of 1924 aroused passions in Bucharest and convinced the Romanian government that this was the way forward. The signing of the Franco-Romanian Treaty on June 10, 1926 strengthened Romania’s position internationally. This success was now to be complemented by a change in the status of the legation in Paris. This step was important for the Romanian authorities because it ensured that Romanian diplomacy would be given special attention and appreciation of the interests that the creditor state attached to its diplomatic relations. Obtaining a new diplomatic status would have corresponded to the will of the Romanian state to take over some of the importance that the former Austro-Hungarian Empire had enjoyed in the past and to assert itself as an important power in south-eastern Europe.

Keywords: Constantin Diamandi; diplomacy; Paris; legation; embassy; government.

Adrian VIŢALARU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0013

Abstract: The study analyses the process of negotiation and ratification of the trade convention between Romania and Poland, signed in Bucharest on 1 July 1921. As Romania and Poland strengthened their political and military relations by signing the treaty of alliance on 3 March 1921, a natural consequence was the strengthening of ties in the economic field. This is why, shortly after the alliance was initialed, negotiations began between the representatives of the two countries. Although the signing of the convention represented an achievement in terms of the economic diplomacy of the two states, the document was only ratified in April 1922 and entered into force in December 1922.

Keywords: trade convention; alliance; Romania; Poland; interwar; commercial agent

Iana BALAN

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0012

Abstract: General Alexei Brusilov’s offensive was one of the outstanding operations of the Russian Army in the First World War. Through the novelty elements and the proposed strategic operations, this operation provided study material for the following generations and stood out with its innovative techniques. Its impact and results have brought positive opinions but also criticism. From a fast and favorable start, it would lose its intensity and lead to massive losses on the part of the Russians that would mark the Russian Army and bring a new wave of criticism towards Tsar Nicholas II, who took over its leadership in the summer of 1915. Among the discussions regarding the impact and effects of the Brusilov offensive were also discussions related to its progress and Romania’s entry into the war. Romanian, Western, and Russian historians have come up with different hypotheses, and opinions are divided. Some historians believe that the Brusilov offensive was a direct catalyst for the negotiations and Bucharest’s final decision to enter the war. While other historians believe that it played an insignificant role. In fact, Bucharest’s decision to submit the declaration of war in Vienna was caused by multiple factors. But the two years of neutrality and negotiations with the Entente Powers and the situation in August 1916 were much more complex than the Brusilov offensive, which had already lost its intensity. In fact, in the general context, the allies had yielded and were prone to yield to the Romanian cause. The situation at the front, the fear of the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian army, and a separate peace with Vienna as a result of the Brusilov offensive, which would have led to the loss of a reason for Romania’s intervention, determined Romania’s entry into the war.

Keywords: First World War; Brusilov offensive; General Alexei Brusilov; Romania’s entry into the war.

Claudiu-Lucian TOPOR

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0011

Abstract: Neutrality-era Romania sometimes behaves like a transit country with the appearance of an oriental bazaar. The ideal place where all sorts of foreigners (some of dubious reputation) come to do noisy business. Eager traders who are eager to make a profit and are eager to get their hands on the most precious commodities in wartime: food and fuel. They were selling, sadly, almost everything. Corruption had touched the moral fibre of a nation in search of its identity. The insiders were well aware of the situation when they wrote: “With the refined senses that usually distinguish thieves, these individuals have noticed that we now have to work with money here and therefore they think that their time has come to fish in troubled waters”. These words belong to Austro-Hungarian plenipotentiary Ottokar Czernin. He recorded them in a report of February 1915 to the Foreign Minister. They show the involvement of Central Power diplomats in secret negotiations on trade arrangements that also concealed political desires in Romania at the time. In the economic sphere, these arrangements were aimed at obtaining the coveted export permits for grain and accepting the transit of munitions for the Ottoman Empire. There were, of course, possible political scenarios arising from the conclusion of the contracts. All were aimed at Romania’s entry into the war against Russia. The War Ministry held such discussions and even concluded a controversial trade treaty. Citing the need to ensure supplies of armaments and the import of ammunition on the old German (or Austro-Hungarian, as the case may be route, which had become inaccessible to Romania when neutrality in the war was proclaimed, the Romanian army chiefs sat down at the negotiating table. This is practically how the “grain for arms” exchange system was set up, a model of lucrative business justified by the superior interests of the state. The corrupt middlemen and officials in particular stood to gain. Many foreign traders were registered with the General Security, and at the time they were also known as grain traders. One of them, Carsten Nielsen, managed to rise to the top. He brokered the signing of a trade contract with the War Ministry which, once in force, would probably have secured Germany a benevolent neutrality from Romania. But this contract was never implemented. Carsten Nielsen suffered considerable damage. Always seeking justice in the interwar years, he created a legal dispute over financial compensation for losses resulting from the blocking of Romanian business. This legal dispute did not die out until the years of Nazi Germany. Nielsen drafted numerous petitions, some of which were even addressed to the German Foreign Ministry. The Communication analyses the contents of these documents and identifies information that sheds new light on the ‘alternatives’ to Romanian neutrality.

Keywords: Neutrality; First World War; grain trading; Romanian government; Nazi Germany.

Simion CÂLŢIA

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0010

Abstract: The study aims to analyse a specific case: the regulations that governed the activity of the chemical-bacteriological laboratory of the Bucharest City Hall in the two decades preceding the First World War. The municipal laboratory had an essential role in introducing in the sphere of food hygiene the norms and practices characteristic to the field of analytical sciences. It also played an important role in the efforts of the municipal medical corps to combat epidemic diseases. The research has two distinct objectives. The regulations were used to understand the municipality’s intentions, how the activity of the laboratory was conceived and what its functions were. We also looked at the difficulties in the operation of the laboratory. A diachronic perspective applied allowed us to see how these issues evolved between 1898 and 1913. The second objective is methodological: to open a discussion on the role that such administrative documents, formulated in an often difficult technical-bureaucratic language, can play in historical research. What kinds of answers can we construct from them, and what are the limitations and pitfalls specific to these kinds of sources?

Keywords: regulations; chemical-bacteriological laboratory; city administration; hygiene; food safety.

Laurenţiu RĂDVAN

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0009

Abstract: In this paper we intend to deal with one of the dimensions of urban reform in the 19th century, the administrative one, with reference to the case of the capital of Moldavia, Iasi. We aimed to highlight the transformations that occurred here in the wake of the adoption of the Organic Regulation and its implementation. This document contains provisions that laid the foundations for a new way of organizing the towns, introducing a first level of autonomy, albeit limited. Even though the Organic Regulation was to enter into force later in Moldavia (from 1 January 1832, as opposed to 1 July 1831 in Wallachia), General Kiseleff also called for the first municipal elections to be held in Iasi at the end of 1831. This marked the beginning of a transitional period, that of the Municipal Council, which functioned between 1 January 1832 and April 1833, with the new institution taking over some of the duties laid down in the Regulation for the better ruling of the city. In the autumn and winter of 1832, a supplementary act to the Organic Regulation was debated, which completed and clarified the structure of the urban administration. The final form of the law was called the „Law for the formation of municipal councils, which would henceforth be called town Eforias, and was published on 24 March 1833. The first elections for the Eforia of Iaşi took place on 11 April 1833 under the coordination of the vornic Iordache Ghica. Of the nearly 500 electors, only about a quarter, 117 voters, understood the importance of the moment and gathered in the hall of the Administrative Council, where a roll call was taken. In addition to Vasile Beldiman, already appointed president of Eforia, Alecu Cantacuzino, Toma Bantăş, Theodor Boţan and Andrei Vizadidis (Vizanti) were elected for a one-year term. From this moment on, we see the extraordinary transformation introduced by the Organic Regulation, practiced in the previous years of the Russian occupation, namely the bureaucratization of the administrative act. In fact, we are dealing with a bureaucratisation of the state, through the creation of modern institutions, which includes Eforia. From now on, every decision and every act will follow an increasingly clear administrative route, although the new system does not impose the concept of efficiency. The definitive transition is now taking place from anaphora to report, from council to Eforia, and then to City Hall, the period we have analysed being decisive in imposing this process.

Keywords: Iaşi; Organic Regulation; city council; Eforia; elections.

Ştefan S. GOROVEI

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2023-0008

Résumé: Le 31 décembre 1816 – selon le vieux calendrier, utilisé à l’époque dans les Principautés Roumaines – le médecin britannique William Macmichael, en route vers la Russie, se trouvait dans la Salle du Trône du palais princier de Jassy (Iaşi), où le prince de Moldavie, Scarlat (Charles) Callimachi, allait investir les nouveaux hauts dignitaires du pays. En attendant, le voyageur examinait attentivement les fresques peintes sur les murs de la salle : un des boyards présents à cette importante cérémonie lui fit connaître que les 22 médaillons qui ornaient les murs représentaient les emblèmes des districts de la Principauté moldave. „La Moldavie toute entière était peinte sur le mur”, ce qui est surprenant, vu que – ajoute le voyageur dans son livre publié en 1819 – „les Russes possèdent la moitié la plus fertile du pays”, tandis que la Moldavie ne possédait plus que 16 de ses anciens districts. En effet, la Paix de Bucarest, de 1812, avait décidé de transférer à l’Empire russe la partie orientale de la Principauté moldave, située entre le Pruth et le Dniestr (Nistru), la future Bessarabie ; il n’y avait donc aucune raison pour que les emblèmes des districts de ce territoire figurent encore dans le grand ensemble héraldique peint dans la Salle du Trône de Jassy. Et quand même… La (re)construction du palais fut achevée en 1806, mais son inauguration solennelle dut être ajournée à cause de la guerre russo-turque; les Principautés ont subi l’occupation russe. On ne peut pas penser que cet ensemble héraldique, comprenant aussi les emblèmes des districts de Bessarabie, eut été réalisé après 1812; par contre, il a été réalisé – selon un projet dû, très probablement, à Johann Freywald, l’architecte autrichien à qui l’on doit la reconstruction du palais – vers 1805-1806, avant la guerre et le démembrement de la Moldavie. Cette information, passée inaperçue dans les recherches consacrées jusqu’à présent à l’héraldique roumaine de district, ouvre la voie à une nouvelle approche de ce sujet. Les autorités de l’occupation russe de 1806-1812 ont créé, pour le Conseil de la Principauté Moldave (Divanul Cnejiei Moldovei), un grand sceau, avec les armoiries du pays (le rencontre d’aurochs) au centre et la bordure ornée de médaillons aux emblèmes des 21 districts. On ne connait pas, jusqu’à ce jour, un document émis dans ce laps de temps et authentifié par l’apposition de ce grand sceau. Par contre, on le voit utilisé après la Paix de Bucarest (1812), par le même prince de Moldavie qui recevait ses dignitaires et les voyageurs étrangers dans la salle ornée avec les mêmes armoiries! L’auteur croit que la conservation, après 1812, de ces deux réalités (l’ensemble héraldique peint vers 1805 et le grand sceau créé vers 1807), représente une sorte de résistance muette, un effort d’exprimer à l’aide du langage héraldique des idées et des sentiments inexprimables par les mots. On peut constater la même attitude après le rapt de la Bucovine en 1775. Créé sous l’influence de l’héraldique russe ou autrichienne, l’ensemble représenté dans le grand sceau et peint sur les murs de la Salle du Trône transmet un message assez cohérent concernant le pouvoir souverain, dont la rencontre d’aurochs est le symbole unique et indivisible. De ce fait même, il représente le prince du pays, chargé de toutes les qualités et de tous les titres de ses prédécesseurs ; cette conception est reflétée dans les vers qui accompagnent, d’habitude, les armes du pays reproduites dans les livres imprimés au cours des XVIIe-XVIIIe siècles. L’auteur croit que cette manière de représenter le pays peut être considérée un manifeste de pouvoir, spécifique au pouvoir souverain, tandis que les grands sceaux portant au centre les armes du pays et en bordure les armes (emblèmes) des districts qui concrétisent ce pays constituent l’équivalent des sceaux de majesté utilisés en Occident.

Mots-clés: Freywald; Macmichael; Scarlat Callimachi; ensemble héraldique; emblèmes (armes) des districts; grand sceau princier; manifeste de pouvoir; sceau de majesté.