Ovidiu BURUIANĂ

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0028

Abstract: In the present study, I analyze the realities of the Central Powers’ occupation (mainly Germany’s) in Romania between 1916-1918 and its representation for the Romanians left in the territory and that not fled to Moldova. Although I include details about how the Central Powers’ occupation was researched in the historiography, I focus on the way in which the experience of Romanians under German administration was subsumed to the need for public legitimacy after the war. A literature of some Romanians’ suffering and resistance during the Germano-Austro-Hungarian domination intersects exculpatory texts regarding those accused of collaborationism. The sides after the war make the moment of the occupation overlap the rift pro-German/pro-Entente. Unlike the decision to participate in the war, where the spokesmen were exclusively members of the political and cultural elites, the subject concerning the position during the conquest of the others generated a more “democratic” debate. It was not only the members of the upper classes who were involved in discourse, on one side or the other, but also secondary characters who became authorized voices in the inter-war context, drawing from the experience from the “German” territory of Romania. Their endeavors are not equal in terms of intentionality, development and language or circulation. The memorialistic works, as auto-referential literature, co-exist with incriminating brochures and newspapers articles, with the parliamentary polemic approaches and those outside the legal forum, which are subsumed to the dynamics of the political game. They are violent in their language or references as they express the euphoria of success and present the treason trials. However, in all these conjectural materials, the authors try to pass verdicts or, on the contrary, to clear them of blame and to justify an act. Due to their diversity, the moral endeavors and the attempts to explain a position are, thus, dissolved in the social texture. These works do not describe a unified culture, but subcultures of suffering or participation. But, The Central Powers’ occupation in Romania generated little variety of attitude from the Romanian elites or the masses. The Romanian’s thoughts and actions were centered around accommodation, regardless of social status. The acceptance of the “foreign” domination was facilitated by the locals’ feeling of being abandoned after the autumn of 1916, but also the fact that occupation meant Germany, with its reputation of great military and civilizational power, with the organization, order and fairness that they introduced. The dilution of the German’s wish to punish their former allies made occupation bearable for most people, for most of the period between November 1916 and December 1918. Excluding the cases of the militant pro-Entente, the majority of those under occupation tried to adapt to the new administrative reality, even if they did it without enthusiasm and, oftentimes, without negotiating.

Keywords: First World War; Military Occupation; pro-German / pro-Entente Figures; Public Representation.

Mihai TUDOSĂ

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0027

Abstract: After a complicated relationship during the first centuries of Christianity, the concepts of military service, war and religion found a compromise in which the later one had the role of limiting (if possible) and comforting the physical and psychological damages of the war. During the Great War, most of the Romanian troops felt very attached to the military priests, alongside religious books and rituals, as an effect of the traditional spiritual society, as well as an effective way of dealing with the psychological struggle exacerbated by the horrors of modern warfare. The clergy was actively contributing to the war effort, being near the troops in their best and worst moments, also helping civilians in need and, in many cases, being involved in educational activities and even in the national struggle for the Unification. Under the cross of common suffering and hope, many soldiers considered Christianity as more important than nation and denomination.

Keywords: military priests; Romania in the Great War; Pimen Georgescu; Vasile Mangra; military prayer books.

Claudiu-Lucian TOPOR

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0026

Abstract: Before the Great War, the Romanian Legation in Berlin represented a privileged destination for those who aspired to the higher ranks of Romanian foreign policy. It was recommended by the importance of Germany in Romania’s security strategy, the role that Berlin occupied among Romania’s allies before the war. The city on the river Spree had become a reference capital on the map of Romanian diplomacy, even before the recognition of independence. A proper diplomatic agency, the fifth after those opened in Constantinople, Paris, Belgrade or Vienna, was in operation since May 1872. The complicated negotiations and arrangements accompanying the pro-German policy of King Carol I speak of its importance. Until April 17, 1880, when the Diplomatic Legation was established, the old agency already covered a wide area of issues, not infrequently controversial ones, between the powerful Germany and the ambitious Romania of those times. Unfortunately, the complete history of the Legation, from its establishment until the severance of diplomatic ties in 1916, remained largely unwritten. Although discovered many years ago, through all kinds of laborious “archival investigations”, the history of this institution still remains a mystery. Today it is certain that it would deserve a more comprehensive historiography. Seen from an administrative point of view, the operation of the Legation remains even less known. Perhaps also for the reason that the documents kept in various archives generally contain little information, often with an arid content that the researchers may be tempted to go through without going in depth. Narratively (following the thread of diplomatic correspondence) and biographically (by rediscovering the lives of some of the ministers plenipotentiary) important progress has been made in recent years. From a military point of view (recounting the activity of the attachés in Berlin) but also from a consular one (the geography of the main Romanian consulates in Germany and the summary description of their activity) the files reveal new opportunities for successful research. This study proposes arguments for a revival of the study of Romanian-German diplomatic ties, having as a starting point the diplomatic correspondence (its relation to the major topics of European geopolitics before 1914), the bureaucratic and administrative operation (the organisational chart, together with the fluctuations taking place at the time) of diplomatic offices, the importance of honorary consulate, as well as the meaning of delegating military attachés.

Keywords: diplomacy; legation; consulate; Germany; Romania; European war.

Simion CÂLŢIA

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0025

Abstract: Our paper aims to analyse the functions fulfilled by the orders and medals in the Romanian state under the reign of Carol I. The decorations were a symbol of sovereignty, and for that precise reason it was difficult for the Romanian state to institute such awards before gaining the Independence. In the diplomatic field, the decorations were a powerful tool, required by the expectations of the foreign politicians and diplomatic practices of the time. The wars fought by Romanian army have as a consequence the creation of new awards, dedicated especially to the military merits. Other function of the decorations came from the necessity to fixate major events in public conscience, or to create a link between the king and his subjects. The most important function was to reward the services rendered to the state and the nation; it was also the most controversial, because of the potential abuse by officials in distributing honours. It was essential for modern states to reward meritorious citizens, by doing so they are transformed in examples for other to follow. In the early years of the Romanian system of awards the attention is focused on the political and social elite, as demonstrated by the founding of two orders in rapid succession. Starting with the end of the 19th century, the award system becomes more democratic, more inclusive, materialized by the establishment of several medals aimed at diverse socio-professional groups.

Keywords: Orders and Medals; function; merit; diplomacy; war; commemoration; institution.

Maria RADOS

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0024

Abstract: This paper focuses on the school reform attempts in Moldavia during 1844-1847. The subject hasn’t been offered the proper attention by literature. Except for a somewhat superficial inquiry (which started interestingly enough but was prematurely discarded) by Alexandru Lapedatu, the specialists in the history of education didn’t venture to investigate this controversial topic, only mentioning its finality (the reform project imposed by prince Mihail Sturdza in 1847) and indiscriminately criticizing all its provisions. Such a simplistic approach disregarded the fact that, besides controversial chapters, that did not cater to the fundamental interests of public education of a civilized state, others were adequate to be included in the 1851 progressive law. The century’s debate reminds of the atmosphere of a popular novel, with intrigue, twists, intimidation and secret influences. The matter didn’t lack tension and hard confrontations between the Public Assembly (Adunarea Obştească) and the Commission for Public Education (Epitropia Învăţăturilor Publice) or even tensions inside the latter organism. There were also many analyses, accusations and propositions from some honoured teachers (Theodor Stamati, Alexandru Costinescu, Damaschin Bojincă şi Ioan Albineţ) who attentively followed the lacking educational system. So, was that a “first reform”, as Lapedatu stated, or not? According to our research, that is not the case. Such attempts to renew and improve the educational system existed before, however, it is true that this time, the involvement of the political body brought additional visibility to the debate and its key actors.

Keywords: school reform; Moldavia; Mihail Sturdza; Academia Mihăileană.

Cristian PLOSCARU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0023

Abstract: During the years of the reign of the native princes, a state of permanent „unrest” persisted in Romanian society and, especially, in political life, characterized by the dispute for power and positions, involving the boyars who remained in the country and the refugees, grouped into several factions. At the same time, the ruling elite was constantly affected by endless discussions and “reckonings” about the financial state of the country, the fiscal policy of the princes and the accumulated debts, the growing deficits and suspicions of corruption. Within this generic framework, we are dwelling with a few sequences of the political history of the Principalities linked to a case concerning the counterfeiting of Turkish currency. These episodes illustrate a certain dynamic of political relations, oriented around the issue of the access to resources, and the great difficulties the two Romanian princes faced in their effort to achieve political and financial stability of their governments.

Keywords: Romanian Principalities; native princes; finances; debts; counterfeit coins; reforms.

Alexandru-Florin PLATON

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0022

Résumé: Membre de la haute noblesse moldave, descendant d’une illustre famille d’origine grecque, le Prince Georges Cantacuzène (1786-1845) a joué un rôle de premier ordre dans l’insurrection grecque de 1821, organisée et menée par l’Hétairie dans les Principautés Roumaines. La relation qu’il a laissée sur cet événement a été conservée jusqu’ici dans deux versions. La première, en allemand, publiée en 1824 à Halle et intitulée Denkschrift des Fürsten Georg Cantacuzeno, a été insérée dans une brochure (Briefe eines Augenzeugen des griechischen Revolution vom Jahre 1821. Nebst einer Denkschrift des Fürsten Georg Cantacuzeno über die Begebenheiten in der Moldau und Walachey in den Jahren 1820 und 1821. Mit Rigas Portrait) à coté de 33 lettres anonymes sur la révolution grecque. Cette version n’a jamais été republiée depuis. La deuxième version, datée 1828 et écrite en français, destinée au colonel russe Ivan Petrovici Liprandi, a été publiée en 1960 par l’historien roumain Andrei Oţetea dans un volume de documents concernant le mouvement insurrectionnel de Tudor Vladimirescu qui a eu lieu à la même année (1821) en Valachie, de connivence avec le soulèvement grec. La troisième version de cette relation (ou « journal », d’après l’intitulé que lui donne l’auteur) – celle que nous avons découvert et que nous publions ici – est inédite. Écrite aussi en français, elle a été conservée dans l’archive de Léonard Revilliod (1786-1867), un Suisse originaire de Genève, qui a passé plusieurs années à Odessa, en Russie, et qui, pendant ce long séjour de 25 ans, s’était vraisemblablement lié d’amitié avec le Prince Cantacuzène, dont la famille avait une propriété non loin de la même ville. Il s’agit d’une copie faite d’après l’original perdu, mais qui, par rapport aux autres relations, est plus exhaustive, avec maints détails concernant les préparatifs de l’insurrection, les circonstances de la nomination du Prince Alexandre Ipsilanti comme chef de l’Hétairie, la politique ambiguë de la Russie envers la révolte qui se préparait, la campagne militaire des Grecs en Moldavie et en Valachie (22 février / 6 mars – 17 / 22 juin 1821) et, finalement, le rôle que le Prince lui-même a joué dans ces événements. Georges Cantacuzène a écrit ce « journal » pour faire mieux ressortir ses mérites au cours de la campagne militaire, mais, surtout, pour se justifier d’avoir abandonné l’armée qu’il commandait avant la dernière bataille (celle de Scouleni, sur le Pruth) contre les Turcs – geste qui a été qualifié par la postérité comme trahison et lui a valu une sorte de « légende noire ». En plus de tous ces éléments, cette version inédite de la relation du Prince Georges Cantacuzène sur les événements de 1821 est au plus haut point intéressante parce qu’elle nous montre de plus près la réalité chaotique et souvent contradictoire d’un événement historique également important tant pour les Roumains, que pour les Grecs.

Mots-clés: Prince Georges Cantacuzène; Hétairie; révolution grecque de 1821; Tudor Vladimirescu.

Laurenţiu RĂDVAN

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0021

Abstract: The present study deals with the origins, the arrival in Moldavia and the vast activity of the engineer and architect Johann Freywald. Until recently he was considered Austrian, but the recent discovery of two passports issued to the architect in 1802 and 1811 has allowed new research to be initiated into its origin. It came from Moravia, being associated with cities such as Prostějov (Prossnitz), Povel (Povl), Olomouc and Brno. He was the son of Johan Feiwald (1721-1825) and Marianne (1734-1807), his father being a well-known builder from Prostějov. After his studies, Johann Freywald distinguished himself in 1791, when he bought the Salm palace in Olomouc’s market square. He expanded it and tried to bring the city theater here, without success. Indebted, he declared bankruptcy in 1801, in the following years having problems due to debts or unfinished constructions. In these conditions, Freywald goes to Moldavia for the first time (1802), probably called by a great boyar for a project. He soon entered the service of Prince Alexandru Moruzi, who hired him to rebuild the palace in the center of the Moldavian capital of Iaşi, which had burned down in 1784 and was abandoned. The building, the largest in the country, received in 1803-1806 a new, neoclassical style, which will be highly appreciated in Moldavia in the following decades. Freywald will work in this style in the following period: on the arrangement of the theater hall in Iaşi, on the repair of the Cazimir house for the Academy, on the Palace Roznovanu in Iaşi, on the Sturza palace and the church in Ruginoasa, on the construction of the new church at the Neamţ monastery, on the new metropolitan cathedral in Iaşi, at the church at the Frumoasa monastery or at the church of St. George in Moghilău, in Podolia. He was also involved in setting up some monuments: in 1809, an obelisk in memory of a Russian officer, Aleksandr Engelhardt, who died in 1770 in Puţeni, in Covurlui county, and another in memory of Potemkin (probably the one from Rădenii Vechi, in Bessarabia); after 1832, Freywald worked together with Gheorghe Asachi and Nicolai Sungurov to erect the lions obelisk in the Public Garden in Iaşi. He will then move for a while to Bucharest, in Wallachia, where he will work on numerous projects: the reconstruction of the Catholic church, the landscaping of the banks of the Dâmboviţa River, the paving of streets, numerous houses in the city. In 1816 he went to Ioannina, Epirus, where he was to help erect some buildings and bridges for the famous Ali Pasha. Freywald will return to Wallachia where he will deal with the restoration of some churches, such as that of the Câmpulung monastery and, probably, that of the Sărindar monastery. He was also involved in business: in 1804, he returned to Moravia, being commissioned by the great boyar Săndulache Sturza to bring craftsmen for the cloth factory he established in Ruginoasa, in Moldavia, which operated until 1813-1814. He also built military hospitals, barracks, made plans, even drew the Balş family crest. He did not break away from his native places: later in life, his name is associated with the building of St. Bartholomew’s Church in Vrahovice, a suburb of Prostějov in 1831-1837. He was not exempt from challenges. Three problems arose in his constructions – more precisely in the church in Moghilău-Podolia (which collapsed), in the new church of the Frumoasa monastery (where intervention was made to save the building) and in the metropolitan cathedral in Iaşi (where, later, the vault collapsed) – which suggests that there were deficiencies in the structure, probably in the calculation of the weight of the vaults. With his wife, Ludowika Brenschütz von Schützenau, he had a girl and two boys (Julius and Gustav), the latter two very active as architects in the years 1840-1850 in the two Romanian principalities. It is possible that Johann died around 1847-1848 in Vienna (unconfirmed information). Johann Freywald remains the first important foreign architect to be active in the Romanian area, his legacy being partly visible to this day.

Keywords: Johann Freywald; architect; Moravia; Romanian Principalities; neoclassical style.

Georgiana Mădălina MIHAI

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0020

Abstract: The dependence of the economy, administration and politics in the mid-18th century on the agrarian profile of Romanian society made it necessary to introduce new forms and structures, close to the modern ones, characteristic of Europe of the time. The reforms initiated by Constantin Mavrocordat, started with the promulgation of the Great Hrisov of 7 February 1741 – the basis of the Organic Regulation adopted in both Principalities between 1831 and 1832 –, were social, administrative, judicial and fiscal. Their purpose was on different levels, aiming to stop abuses, eliminate the accumulation of powers, establish the functioning of the judiciary system, standardize fiscal obligations towards the state and extend the category of taxpayers. From an administrative point of view, the number of counties of Moldavia varied according to the reign and historical circumstances, in the period between the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century. Roman County appeared constantly in the lists identified in various documents, from the “Aşezământul” from 1741 to the “Condica liuzilor” from 1803 and the cartographies made in the first half of the 19th century. The division of Roman County into three subdivisions, the Upper, Lower and Middle districts, made in 1741, was to be maintained until the new administrative-territorial organization from 1835, which began with the process of the enlargement of the counties, stipulated in Article 139 of the Organic Regulation. In the “Table of the village community”, which came into force only with the ruler’s approval in 1835, among the 13 counties of Moldavia, the Roman county was divided into four districts: Moldova, Siretul de Sus, Siretul de Jos and Fundul. Although applied under provisional conditions, the “Table of the village community” represented the model of the administrative-territorial organization of Moldavia, until 1864.

Keywords: Mavrocordat; Organic Regulation; Roman; reform; county.

Laurenţiu RĂDVAN

Mihai Anatolii CIOBANU

DOI: 10.47743/asui-2022-0019

Abstract: In the Military-Historical Archive from Moscow (RGVIA) there are numerous plans of regions from Romanian area, fortresses, cities, military routes, points of interest for the Russian army and administration interested in expanding their control or influence in South-Eastern Europe. Among the maps, there are also some of villages, most of them erected for reasons similar to those mentioned above. However, one plan caught our attention because it doesn’t seem to have any military significance. It is the plan of the village of Lăzăreni and the surrounding region, drawn in 1791 by surveyors led by second major I. Kupcinov. The central point of interest of the plan is the residence of the great boyar Vasile Ruset (Rosetti), with the nearby church, garden, stables, mills, vineyards. Above the mansion was the village of Lăzăreni, and further north, in the forest, there is a hermitage, which we identified it as the mysterious Stânca hermitage on Jijia. The plan captures very well the topography and hydrography of the area, which have changed very little until today. The analysis of the written sources revealed the reasons for the making of this plan. At the Ruset boyar’s mansion, was present for more than two years marshal Petr Alexandrovich Rumyantsev (Zadunaischi), who had already distinguished himself through a long military career, started with the war with Sweden in 1741-1743, continued in the Seven Years’ War and culminated in the war Russian-Turkish from 1768-1774. He was sent to Moldavia in 1788, but age and illness, along with disagreements with Potemkin, led him to retire in the spring-summer of 1789 to the mansion of Lăzăreni, where he stayed until after the signing of the peace of Iasi (Jassy), from January 1792. Several letters sent from Lăzăreni by count Rumyantsev to Catherine II have been preserved. The residence here was visited and described in 1794 by Johann Christian von Struve and Heinrich von Reimers. The Lăzăreni estate and the mansion remained in the possession of the Ruset family, later passing to the Sturza family. It was destroyed in World War II, with only a few cellars, the church and a ruined vault nearby surviving.

Keywords: Moldavia; Lăzăreni; Rumyantsev; Ruset family; map; topography.