Category: RRI Encyclopaedia

  • The reel-to-reel tape recorder  at Radio Romania

    The reel-to-reel tape recorder at Radio Romania

    Broadcasting owes an important part of its functioning over time to the reel-to-reel tape recorder. Numerous archives in the world are still on analog media, and the reel-to-reel tape recorder is the equipment to which this huge and invaluable legacy is due. An invention of the first decades of the 20th century, the steel-wire reel tape recorder is the first in the history of broadcasting used to record voices. But the first magnetic tape recorder, produced by the German corporation AEG and first used in 1935, would be the starting point for several generations of magnetic tape equipment that will dominate the audio market in the second half of the 20th century.

    Radio Romania kept up with the times, and equipping technicians and journalists with tape recorders to do their job was a priority. A technical history of the Romanian Radio includes in its pages tape recorders of the highest performance. And many stories still unwritten have the tape recorder as a hero. Engineer Ilie Drăgan, who held the position of technical director, was interviewed in 2000 by the Oral History Center of Romanian Broadcasting. He joined Radio Romania in 1958, and was head of the Transmissions department, which operated the technical equipment.

    “I remember that we were making transmissions with some equipment on electronic tubes, we called them CN, and in order to have a backup power supply, we used some 110 Volt batteries, so-called ‘bricks’. They were, in volume, the size of two bricks placed one on top of the other. And when we went on trips, the equipment with special cars was not at the level that exists today, we put these bricks, which were two in number, in a bag. We also took a tape recorder that often weighed over 35 kilograms, which ran on paper tape, and we would leave by train somewhere in the province to make recordings. In the conditions in which recordings were made in the agricultural field, the editors and technicians had to go to the field, to the place where the agricultural products were made, there was no electricity on site and the Transmission service was equipped with two or three generator sets that we put in the car. We would arrive at the recording site, fill them with gasoline, start them, power the tape recorders and that’s how the recordings were made in those days.”

    In its equipment with tape recorders, there were four periods in the history of Radio Romania. The first was that of the war and the 1950s when tape recorders with steel wire reels were still used. From the beginning of the 1950s, the generation of magnetic tape recorders would replace tape recorders with steel wire reels. The second period was the 1960s and the first half of the 1970s when tape recorders had to be purchased from CAER, the economic association of the socialist states. In the CAER convention, Hungary was designated to produce equipment of this kind. The third period was the opening towards the West, between 1975 and 1985. Western tape recorders were clearly superior in quality and price, and Radio Romania purchased technology from Western manufacturers. The fourth period was the return to purchases from the socialist bloc, after 1985. Here is Ilie Drăgan:

    “Hungary was the one recorded in the CAER treaties to produce, only the Hungarians had the right to produce tape recorders and desks. After that, the Germans also proposed a version of tape recorders, and in Czechoslovakia they produced reporting cars. We also purchased some reporting cars on Škoda buses, but they were equipped with Hungarian mixing desks and Hungarian tape recorders. Later, the Czechs managed in Bratislava to replace the Hungarian desks with desks made by Tesla Bratislava. So, in 1989, when Radio Romania bought a reporting truck that is currently in operation, they had Czech mixing desks, but Hungarian tape recorders.”

    Ilie Drăgan remembered the evolution of tape recorders at Radio Romania as he encountered them in a long career of 42 years as an electronics engineer: from tape recorders that used paper tape to portable shoulder-mounted recorders.

    “They were very heavy tape recorders. They were taken out of service, they weighed about 35 kilograms, two people had to carry a tape recorder to go somewhere to record. It was a pain. When you think that now an editor takes something that he holds in half a palm and makes quality recordings. After these tape recorders, some Philips Juniors appeared that were the size of a slightly larger diplomat’s bag, they also weighed about 16 kilograms. In any case, it was incomparable with the 35-kilogram one. And all the recordings were made in conditions in which the editor could not move alone and always had to take a technician with him. The Uher portable tape recorders appeared later.”

    Tape recorders are now museum pieces and still arouse curiosity and attraction among those passionate about the history of science and technology. At Radio Romania, the tape recorder is still present, and coexists with the new generations of digital equipment.

  • Sculptor Frederic Storck

    Sculptor Frederic Storck

    Bucharest is home to one of the most beautiful museums in Romania: the Frederic Storck and Cecilia Cuțescu-Storck Museum, a memorial house that is part of the Bucharest Municipality Museum (MMB). The museum is also an impressive workshop in terms of its architecture and style, and especially for the art collection it hosts. This museum is devoted to two great interwar artists of Romania, husband and wife, key figures of the cultural and academic world of their time.

     

    Sculptor Frederic Storck (1872-1942) was one of the most prominent figures of Romanian interwar art. He was one of the most representative and versatile sculptors. His artistic activity span a long period of time and his works are, with very few exceptions, executed with great skill, very unified and at the same time, very varied.

     

    More details about Frederic Storck from the deputy director of the Bucharest Municipality Museum, Elena Olariu:

     

    “Frederic Storck was the son of Karl Storck and the brother of Carol Storck, all great sculptors. He had permanent exhibitions in Romania, but also in Germany, because Frederic Storck completed his art studies in Munich, Germany. He also traveled to Paris, He stayed here for a period of time to further his studies, before returning to Romania. In 1901, one of the most important artistic associations in Romania was founded, “Tinerimea artistică” – the Art Youth. Storck was a founding member, along with other great Romanian artists. He was active in this association for a very long time, and his most important role was as an active talent scout. In this search for young talented artists, he discovered and tried to promote Cecilia Cuțescu, who had stayed in Paris after finishing her studies, alongside her first husband. Over the years, they would get to know each other better, fall in love and get married after Cecilia Cuțescu’s divorce. His activity at Tinerimea artistică also linked this association to Princess Maria, who had become an enthusiastic admirer of Romanian art, and Frederic Storck wanted to attract her as much as possible to this area. In fact, she became the patron of Art Youth. The relationship between Princess Maria and Frederic Storck was special. He was extremely hardworking, had an extraordinary energy and was somehow the soul of these great exhibitions. The connection with the royal family, which continued since his father’s time, was, let’s say, crowned with success. Like his father, Frederic Storck created various sculpted portraits of members of the royal family, including one made for King Carol I, but also another splendid one made for Queen Maria. They were recently restored and are exhibited at the Frederic Storck and Cecilia Cuțescu-Storck Museum”.

     

    Frederic Storck’s work is characterized by a harmonious interweaving of elements that are a tribute to classicism with modernist overtones. The artist’s vision was moderate, with slight stylizations, pursuing elegance of composition, the inner expression and the perfection of the form. Elena Olariu tells us about some of the artist’s major works:

     

    “Frederic’s fame also brings him important commissions. For example, he created 8 caryatids for the famous Cantacuzino Palace in Bucharest. In 1907, Frederic Storck executed an important commission, two sculptures representing industry and agriculture for the Administrative Palace in Galați and also for the municipality there he created the monument devoted to Mihai Eminescu. In 1930, he was commissioned to sculpt the portrait of Beethoven. He also created statuary groups for the Credit Bank of Romania. So, somehow Frederic Storck, just like his father, actively contributed to the beautification of modern Romanian cities”.

     

    In 1906, Frederic Storck became a professor at the School of Fine Arts in Bucharest. He was a methodical teacher who enjoyed great artistic prestige. He instilled in his students respect for drawing, the basic prerequisite for the study of any plastic representation. More about his teaching activity from Elena Olariu:

     

    “Perhaps the most important part pf his career was his tenure at the Academy of Fine Arts in Bucharest, where he taught sculpture for decades, being extremely appreciated and loved by his students. He dedicated almost his entire life to this dream of training as many sculptors as possible in Romania. And, indeed, his students loved him greatly for his seriousness, for his extraordinary capacity for work, for his talent and for this willingness to sacrifice himself and give back to the community”. (VP)

  • The Constanta Casino

    The Constanta Casino

    We invite you to discover the story of the Casino in Constanta, the emblem of the largest Romanian port city on the Black Sea, founded by Greek colonists in antiquity under the name of Tomis. The name of this settlement is linked to the legend of the Argonauts, but especially the exile of the Latin poet Publius Ovidius Naso. The symbol of the city today is, indisputably, the casino, built in the Art Nouveau style, and inaugurated in 1910, on August 15, when Romania celebrates Navy Day.

    Since 1879, Constanta has been seen not only as a port, but also as a seaside resort. In 1880, the first dance hall was created – the Guarracino Hall, seriously damaged in 1891 by a strong storm. The following year, the city hall built a new building, which operated until the spring of 1910. The story of the casino itself begins, however, in 1903, when mayor Cristea Georgescu signed a contract with architect Daniel Renard, who would design the casino’s plans in the Art Nouveau style, explains Delia Roxana Cornea, interim director of the Constanța Museum of National History and Archaeology.

    “On August 15, 1910, this beautiful Carol I Communal Casino was inaugurated, the title with which it appeared in the press of the time, which treated this subject very well. We even have the menu served at the inauguration, with wild fowl eggs, fois gras, Drăgășani wine and other such products. The casino had a very good evolution until around the First World War. In 1916, Dobrogea fell under German-Bulgarian occupation and many of the buildings in Constanta were occupied, and upon departure were looted. This was also the case with the Casino, which had been transformed into a military hospital and, although it had the Red Cross on the roof, it seems that a bomb still fell on it, destroying part of the interior staircase. Rebuilt in the 1920s, the Casino regained its splendor in the interwar period when August 15 and the nautical celebrations were very intensely experienced by both locals and visitors. Other events also took place. Almost all charity balls took place at the Communal Casino, we have confirmations of the presence of various members of the royal family. The tradition was perpetuated on August 15 among Romanians, it has been celebrated with the same pomp for decades to the present day.”

    The Casino’s peak moment was reached, therefore, in the 1920s and 1930s, when Constanța became a very prosperous city, says historian and writer Cristian Cealera, a guide at the city’s National Museum of History and Archaeology.

    “Let’s not forget that there were 19 minorities in Dobrogea, but following a census in Constanța, which had a population of over 56,000 inhabitants in the 1920s, no less than 33 nationalities were registered. It is less known that, at that time, there were transatlantic flights from Constanța to New York, and that in some gardens, even on the terrace of the Casino, bands from New Orleans would come and play jazz. It is a history with salt and pepper, because we are talking about sopranos and tenors from La Scala in Milan, about groups of actors who fought to get a contract at the Casino in the summer. World boxing champions met at the Casino or on the improvised arena in front of the building. People loved coming here. Let’s not forget the Navy Days, August 15 was the most important event every summer. Of course, gambling, more prominent in the 1930s, brought both good and less good things. The whole city prospered, restaurants and hotels recorded very good incomes, but at the same time gambling claimed victims because, while the rich left Monte Carlo to come to Constanța because it was even cheaper, the less fortunate, the petty officials, the locals, did not know how to manage this problem, and hence many sad stories. We have all kinds of events recorded in the press of the time: suicides, scandals like “the girlfriend spent the boyfriend’s money who the next day eagerly followed her to shoot her on the Casino promenade.”

    After 1940, the building fell under a shadow, because World War II had already begun. It was occupied by German troops and then by Soviet troops, after October 1944. The casino had a sad story during the communist period, at least in the beginning. Although it was left in disrepair for a long time, the question of its reuse was raised again, and the renovation works in the 1950s used a workforce based not only on civilians, but also on political prisoners from the prisons and camps on the Danube-Black Sea Canal. A sad reality, also demonstrated by two notes written by the team led by architects Constantin Joja and Ion Cristodulo, political prisoners at the time. The first note was discovered in the walls of the casino during the restoration works that began in early 2020, and the second in 2023. From the 1980s until after 1990, the Casino in Constanța functioned as a restaurant-terrace. After 2000, it was closed to the public until sufficient funds and solutions for restoration were found. The building will host exhibition spaces dedicated to the history of the Casino and a multifunctional cultural center.

  • The Pogroms in Iasi and Bucharest

    The Pogroms in Iasi and Bucharest

    In 2025, at the beginning of the year, it will be 84 years since the Bucharest Pogrom of January 21-23, 1941, and 80 years since the liberation of the largest Nazi extermination camp at Auschwitz (Poland), on January 27, 1945. Two sad commemorations for the modern history of the world and Romania. The Bucharest Pogrom was a series of violent manifestations and crimes against Jews, which took place during the Legionary Rebellion of January 1941. It is considered the largest and most violent pogrom against Jews in Wallachia (a southern region of Romania). The same year, 1941, in the Moldavian region, between June 27-30, another pogrom took place, perhaps the most violent in the history of Jews in Romania. In those days of June 1941, 13,266 Jewish citizens of Iași were killed.

    Film director Copel Moscu is of Jewish origin. He has made over 50 short and feature films, as a director and screenwriter, with multiple national and international awards. At the end of 2024, the premiere of his film “Bloody Photographs” took place, a documentary that evokes the earth-shattering events during the Iași Pogrom. We talked to the director about his origins and how these events were viewed during his childhood and youth, before the fall of communism in 1989:

    “First of all, you know very well that I come from a family of Jewish origin. The interesting part is that during my childhood and youth I did not hear any stories about this pogrom. This terrible event, indeed, a black stain in modern history. But my parents wanted to stop me from judging those times, through ignorance. And I was very interested in what happened to our relatives, because we also had victims, relatives and friends who were victims of the Holocaust. This obscuring of real history was very fashionable at that time. The communist authorities actually discussed very little, almost nothing, about this event. It was not forbidden, but it was not good to talk. … It was an extreme derailing of history. I hope that it will be unique in history, that when some people who knew each other very well became enemies and some suppressed others without a very clear explanation, just out of hatred… ”

    How the director Copel Moscu worked on this documentary, he himself tells us:

    There are photographs of these events kept at CNSAS. There are still a lot of classified documents and images, I don’t know for what reason, but which will someday be declassified and offered to the general public. It’s very interesting that, here, there are still secret things in our history, and probably we will continue to get great surprises, because the documents and photographs and images and accounts of those times are beginning to become clear, and each of us will interpret them in our modern way of thinking. We must understand that a certain era has a certain vision of history, and it is difficult to understand if we do not go into the depth of these details.”

    The documentary “Bloody Photographs” presents images that illustrate the preparation and implementation of the pogrom, from the marking of houses where Jews lived, to the columns of Jews made to dig the pits into which their fellow citizens were to be thrown. Copel Moscu talks to us about the effect of these photographs on the audience, and the way in which they were inserted into the documentary film:

    “It’s called the parallax effect in which you can somehow turn a two-dimensional photograph into a three-dimensional somehow, to give the viewer the opportunity to experience that image more intensely… The images that are negatives. Those are exactly the moments when death is being talked about… I mean, people can see the X-rays of their own existences at certain moments. …”

    Can this documentary film become a study material within educational institutions for the new generations, to understand those moments in Romanian history?

    “I say that this film should be shown in schools, especially since it is an almost mandatory subject. Let’s say, it’s optional, but it’s in the school curriculum. The Holocaust is studied. … Seeing this film, they might form an opinion about that era, about the relationships between people, about how a crisis situation can be thought of.”

    This documentary brings back into the collective consciousness those moments of dramatic history. At that time, Romanian legislation from the last year of the reign of Carol II elevated to the rank of law racial discrimination against Jews, considered an “inferior race”. The National Legionary State tightened and restricted the civil liberties and rights of Jews. During the Legionary Rebellion, thousands of Jews from Bucharest were arrested, investigated and tortured. Temples and synagogues were desecrated and looted. A series of murders took place in the Jilava forest near the capital. According to statistics from those tragic moments, there were over 120 Jews killed in the Bucharest Pogrom, 1274 shops, apartments, and workshops devastated, and hundreds of truckloads of looted items were taken. These events in Bucharest were denied or omitted from recent history along with the suppression of the Legionary Rebellion. Theories have been put forward about alleged conspiracies by Jews and communists in connection with the Bucharest Pogrom and the veracity of those facts.

  • Portraits of Romanian sovereigns

    Portraits of Romanian sovereigns

    In art, portraits have at least one important particularity, namely the interest in the person in the painting.

     

    In time, people portrayed by paintings have been sovereigns, political leaders, noblemen, warriors, clergy, thinkers, but also ordinary people. Portraits of sovereigns have always exerted a great attraction for people. Marina-Cristiana Rotaru teaches English at the Technical University of Construction in Bucharest and has studied socio-semantic interpretation of portrait art. She studied royal portraits from the view point of the message transmitted by the sovereign through nonverbal communication. In this sense, she took into account the distance, the angle, the gaze and the story of the painting. And as an object of research, she stopped at one of the portraits of Queen Maria of Romania, made by the German Friedrich August von Kaulbach: “The distance does not seem to be that great. We can conclude that we are in some kind of relationship with Maria because we already know her, we know who she is, she is no longer a stranger to us. From the point of view of the vertical angle, it is not always clear whether her gaze is above our gaze or not. This does not always matter. We can say that we are more or less on the same level, we are on a kind of equality, but not equality of status, but equality of belonging, let’s say, to the same race. We already see her as our princess, she is no longer a British, foreign princess. Judging by horizontal angle, we see her in a position that is neither frontal nor in profile, it is somewhere in between. We notice that she is not looking at us, she is ignoring us, she has something against us, she is angry with us or she wants to tell us something else. We also look at her gaze, she is slightly melancholic. We also look at her clothing, we see that she has some flowers, some roses, and we wonder why she put those on?”

     

    The story of the painting seems to be a decisive criterion in knowing what the future sovereign wants to tell us: “We know from books, from her autobiographic book, that when she came to the country it was very difficult for her. Her first years were hard years, naturally, because she had come to a country that for her was Terra incognita. She did not know the language, she did not know the customs, she did not know, in fact, anyone. The only lady companion that King Carol had given her was a lady much older than her, who was only 17. She was still a child, in fact. An English lady stayed with her for a while, then went back to England. And she suddenly finds herself alone among strangers, as even her husband was a stranger. And then, what happens to the individual when being suddenly alone among strangers? They go through what we today call culture shock and we know that there are stages of culture shock. The first stage is called the honeymoon, and in Maria’s case this month had passed very quickly. After that comes the stage of disorientation. You look left, right, you don’t know anyone, you don’t know where to go, you don’t know what to do with yourself? After the disorientation stage comes an even harder one, the stage of irritability and hostility when everything seems to be against you and, whether you want it or not, you enter a kind of depression. I suspect that this is what happened to Princess Maria and the portrait, I suspect, captures the princess during this period.”

     

    Searching for oneself in a new situation is something that every human being goes through, and therefore also a crowned head. Even if public opinion would say that a sovereign has everything at his disposal, it is not exactly accurate. Maria of Romania had to overcome important obstacles in her life, as we can see from the painting analyzed by Marina-Cristina Rotaru: “In such moments, people ask themselves questions, such as who am I? What am I doing here? What is wrong with me here? But, first of all, it is the question Who am I? That’s where it starts, from this question comes the answer she wants, from this question appears the anchor she ties herself to in order to rise from that situation. And, probably, in response to Maria’s question, she puts some roses on her chest. Is the choice random? I suspect not. And we go back to her story. She comes to the country as a British princess, an identity element to which she has remained faithful all her life. We know that in Great Britain, the historical region we know as England has the rose as its symbol. What Maria puts on her chest is the Rose of England. She couldn’t scream: I am a British princess! I come from the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha dynasty. She understands, she realizes, what her role is and that through Ferdinand’s marriage to her, the Romanian dynasty suddenly gained a different weight.”

     

    The portraits of sovereigns have life and, therefore, words. And that of Queen Maria of Romania is one from which we learn about a huge personality in Romanian history who knew how to speak to her people and identify with them.

  • Tighina Fortress

    Tighina Fortress

    Tighina Fortress (renamed to Bender by the Turks), located on the banks of the Dniester in Ukraine, is a 15th-century Moldavian fortress from the reign of Stephen the Great, originally built of earth and wood, to defend the ford of the Dniester River from Tatars. The earthen citadel was probably round or semi-circular, with a defensive moat, and the bunk-type dwellings were made of wood, as archaeological excavations have shown. The fortress was rebuilt by the Moldavian ruler Petru Rareș and then conquered by the Turkish Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent in 1538, becoming the residence of the Turkish Raia (an administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire), and having its name changed to Bender (meaning river port or mooring place). During this period the citadel was rebuilt in stone and enlarged, and it was completed in 1541. The forress then had a tumultuous fate, coming under the control of the Russian Empire for a period, until 1812, when it began to lose its former strategic importance.

    Cristina Rus, who is a tourist guide, told us more about Tighina Fortress and its history:

    “Of course, there are many sources and the information actually differs depending on the origin of the guide who talks about it. If it is a guide from the left bank of the Dniester (Transnistria), they would prefer to say that it is a fortress that was built by Suleiman the Magnificent. I personally believe that this is one of the fortresses that were built by Stephen the Great, and we can defend this with information that confirms that Stephen the Great built on the right bank of the Dniester a defensive fortresses, to defend the borders in the eastern part of Moldavia. Among them are other fortresses, such as the Hotin fortress, Soroca, Tighina, but also the White Fortress. So, of all these 4 fortresses built by Stephen the Great on the right bank of the Dniester River for defense, today controlled by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova, only the Soroca fortress was left. Returning to the history of Tighina fortress, as I said, the first order to build the fortress came from Stephen the Great, although Stephen the Great’s grandfather, Alexander the Good, is the one who first mentions the town of Tighina. Then, Stephen the Great builds the fortress and Petru Rareș strengthens it with stone. Then, already in the 16th century, Suleiman the Magnificent conquers the fortress and with each conquest and each ruler that changes, it is absolutely normal for more changes to occur. So the way we see the fortress today, it does not look exactly like it did in the time of Stephen the Great. However, the fortress is included in the route “On the footsteps of Stephen the Great and the Holy”. The fortress was built of limestone with sand mixed with eggs and animal fur. In the old days, there were no other building materials, but these materials were strong and qualitative enough so the walls of the fortress have survived to this day. Some constructions on the territory of the fortress have not survived until today, because the fortress, until recently, had only a military purpose, and only in the 21st century it opened its doors for tourists.

    Also, in recent years, a park was created at the entrance to the Citadel. The fortress has defense towers and is surrounded on three sides by a moat, which was empty and never filled with water, to prevent the enemies from easily entering the citadel. On the other side was the bank of the Dniester river. Being a fortress built on the bank of the river, it was always a very convenient place for trade. In the Middle Ages, merchants would come from the Black Sea on the Dniester River, go up and gather into a market organized especially for merchants from around the world. The local guides talk about the fact that there were also churches or places of religious worship for the different peoples connected with the trade in the space of the city. They speak of an Armenian church and a Greek church there. They also say that there would have been a mosque. So far there are no ruins to prove these things, so we have to take their word for it.”

    Four fortresses were built by the ruler of Moldavia Stephan the Great as defense points along the Dniester river: Soroca, Tighina, Hotin and Cetatea Albă (the White Fortress), with an exit to the Black Sea. The history of these fortresses and their territories has been a turbulent in the more recent history, after 1812. Cristina Rus gave us some details about this period:

    “The White Fortress and the Hotin Fortress are both fortresses built on the right bank of the Dniester River, by order of Stephen the Great. Today, these two cities are not on the territory of the Republic of Moldova and this happened after the Second World War, when the territories were divided. To better understand, I will go back a little in history. In 1812, our historical Moldavia was divided in two, using the Prut river as its natural border. This division of territories occured both after the Russo-Turkish War and after the war between the Ottoman Empire and the Romanian Principalities, when the Romanian Principalities lost the war, they had to give something to the Ottoman Empire. In the same year, 1812, the Ottoman Empire lost the war against the Russian Empire and so the Ottoman Empire had to give something to the Russians. …So the Russian Empire started investing in Bessarabia. … The Russian Empire needed a city to turn into a regional capital, so that it would be easier for them to control all the space. Thus, they decided to choose Chisinau, which was quite a small village until that moment. … First World War. Many European countries had their borders changed … And then, during that exceptional period of revolution, the Russians failed to act quickly enough. But they understood that they had lost a piece of land in which they had invested for the last 100 years. From Bessarabia, which had just entered the composition of the Soviet Union, they took the exit to the see, where we had the White Fortress, and Northern Bucovina, where we had the Hotin fortress. … And thus we lost control over these two fortresses, which today are in Ukraine.” (MI)

  • Soroca Citadel

    Soroca Citadel

    Soroca Citadel is a Moldavian fortress located in the Republic of Moldova, near the town of Soroca and in the district bearing the same name, dating from the 16th century. The few existing archaeological and documentary evidence about the citadel tells us that it was built by the Moldavian ruler Stephen the Great in 1499 and rebuilt in stone by Petru Rareș in mid 16th century. It was a strategic stronghold in mediaeval Moldavia, acting as a trading centre defended by the fortified walls of the citadel, as well as an economic centre for the entire Soroca area.

    The name “Soroca” itself has its own history and significance. According to some documentary sources, it means “poor”. It also means deadline by which an action can be performed say by which an obligation is to be fulfilled; limit, border. Other sources says it may come from “Sora”, “Sorița” or Soare”, the alleged names of the first owners of the estate located in the Nistru floodplain where the citadel was later erected.  Dumitru Ungureanu, a museographer and guide at Soroca Cidadel, tells us more about the origins of the citadel and the archaeological speculations in respect of this:

    “History is partially hidden, because the first time the princely seat was mentioned it was 12th July 1499 in a peace treaty signed between John Albert and Stephen the Great. The Letter of Hârlău also mentions the administrator of Soroca, Coste, which means that the citadel had been built by this time, but unfortunately, there is no information as to how old it was. What we do know is that before the stone fortress we see today there used to one made of wood and clay, a pretty large structure. Historians’ views are split when it comes to the age of the stone construction. Some says the citadel mentioned in 1499 was the old one made of wood and clay, with the stone structure to be built after 1543. There is a letter by Petru Rareș, the son of Stephen the Great, sent to a loyal master builder from Bistrița and asking him to work on the citadel in Soroca. I personally don’t agree with this interpretation. Archaeological finds include coins from the reign of Bogdan III, before the time of Petru Rareș, which mention the citadel in Latin: Castrum nostru Soroceanu, our Soroca citadel that defends us from the pagan. So, in 1512, Bogdan probably knew about the low size of Soroca and the fact that it looked more like a castle than a fortress. And now we have to ask yourselves, how often do you castles made of wood? It would not have been called a castle if it was made of wood. It can only mean that by 1512, the stone structure was already built, but no one yet known was exactly it was built. There are records of a priest called Răuțu Melete who says that during a visit by some dignitary to Soroca, he took a commemoration stone on which was inscribed the year when the citadel was built and the name of the master builder. There is, however, no trace of the stone in question or its whereabouts.”

    Soroca Citadel has a very distinctive shape and a layout that was innovative at the time it was built. Dumitru Ungureanu tells us more:

    “The way in which the Soroca Citadel is built is unique in the world. Its architecture is very similar to what we see in Italy. First and foremost, in term of its dimensions. The size of the Soroca fortress is equivalent to a hundred paces, which is very common in Italian architecture. Moreover, it uses the golden ratio. The towers are 13 meters apart from each other. In addition, a series of works seen at the Soroca Fortress were innovative and seen in no other medieval Moldavian fortresses. For example, in each of the circular towers the citadel has five towers, one of them being prismatic or rectangular, the other four being circular; in each of the circular towers there is a bathroom, for the comforts of the soldiers, with regular sewage system. Sewage systems only appear in the architecture of medieval Moldova in the 17th century, two hundred years later. On the upper floor of the Soroca Citadel we have the passage of the guards, which is another innovation, because no other fortress features a 360-degree guard road. This meant that archers could shoot from up high, making it almost impossible to approach the citadel. They could also fire cannons from above. The stone from which the Soroca Fortress is built is a very fine marl stone, which was very hard to break with a cannonball. That’s why it’s still in such good condition after such a long time. The fortress of Soroca never fell into ruin. It is still 70-75% authentic, which makes it the best-preserved citadel from the time of medieval Moldavia today.”

    After the exit of the Republic of Moldova from the Soviet Union, the Soroca Citadel has been restored.  Dumitru Ungureanu explains:

    “Both restoration projects were conducted in the period after the end of the Soviet Union. Carried out between 2013 and 2015 and between 2021 and 2023, they have been financed by the European Union. In the first stage of restoration, the rectangular entrance tower was completely restored and roofs were added to all the towers. In the last restoration stage, the masonry of the Soroca Citadel was strengthened by recreating the mortar in the stonework. The masonry was then cleaned, which is why everybody says it looks like new.  It is not new, it has only been washed after a fire that blackened its walls.”

  • The mathematician Dan Barbilian, aka the poet Dan Barbu

    The mathematician Dan Barbilian, aka the poet Dan Barbu

     

    There are few personalities who manage to perform at a high level in different, even opposite, fields, as was the case of the mathematician Dan Barbilian, aka the poet Ion Barbu, who is remembered for having excelled at both mathematics and literature. Dan Barbilian was gifted with a unique talent for the science of mathematics and the art of poetry, but he worked hard to put it to good use.

     

    Dan Barbilian was born in 1895 in Câmpulung Muscel into a family of magistrates and died in 1961 in Bucharest. He had been passionate about mathematics ever since primary school, and during high school he published in the magazine “Gazeta Matematica”, a mathematics magazine where we also find the most important Romanian mathematicians. His passion for poetry also dates from around this time, but it wasn’t until 1919 that he made his literary debut, in the magazine “Sburătorul”. He first studied mathematics at the University of Bucharest and, after the end of the First World War, between 1921 and 1924, he went to Germany, to study in Göttingen, Tübingen and Berlin.

     

    In 1929, he earned his doctoral degree in mathematics under his Bucharest teacher, the mathematician Gheorghe Țițeica, and embarked on a busy scientific career,  taking part in many international congresses. He became a professor of algebra at the Faculty of Sciences in Bucharest where he taught algebra, geometry, number theory, group theory and axiomatics. He also taught courses at universities in the German-speaking world. A metrization procedure will be named after him, known as the “Barbilian spaces”, and another of his contributions paved the way for research in the geometry of rings. He also contributed to the standardization of algebraic geometry.

     

    Mathematician and writer Bogdan Suceava told us more about the educational opportunities enjoyed by a very talented young man like Dan Barbilian in a country that was building itself up by borrowing from the European models: “Dan Barbilian wins the Gazeta Matematica competition in 1912 and, interestingly, I even found a mention of his name in the American Mathematical Society database. You really had to be someone to be mentioned there in a chapter on mathematics. Barbilian is related to 51C05, which is something from ring geometry. He introduced the spaces now named after him in 1934, but at the beginning he worked as a math solver for the magazine. He won the magazine’s competition in 1912, and later he studied in Göttingen with David Hilbert, Emmy Noether and Edmund Landau, but also produced interesting literary work. He has very important contributions in the field of algebra and is the author of an axiomatic approach to mechanics published in 1943, which went largely unnoticed. He was, creator of mathematics of the highest order, with his formative years being linked to the Gazeta Matematica.”

     

    At the same time, mathematician Dan Barbilian wrote poetry under the name Ion Barbu, which was a return to the family’s original name. He was in the entourage of literary critic Eugen Lovinescu and his literary circle “Sburătorul”. Another literary critic, Tudor Vianu, a friend of Barbu since high school, is the author of a volume in which he analyzes the mathematician’s poetry. Thus, according to Vianu, Barbu’s poetic work is divided into several periods: the Parnassian period inspired by French Parnassian poetry until 1925, the period of the oriental ballad after 1925, inspired by Romanian authors like Anton Pann or writings whose hero was Nastratin Hogea, and the hermetic period. The last period was named as such due to the encryption of poetic meanings that Barbu makes.

     

    Two poems from Barbu’s poetic work are very well-known today, “Riga Crypto and Enigel the Lapp” and “After the Snails”, the latter being the title of a folk song composed by Nicu Alifantis in 1979. Reading Dan Barbilian’s notes, Bogdan Suceavă was pleasantly surprised to discover a powerful literary description of the mathematician’s memories related to important moments in his life: “About the 1912 competition, he wrote in the 1950s: ‘The problem bears the seal of Ion Banciu, a member of the algebra commission, dear, unforgettable, great professor.’ Barbilian is sentimental when he wants to be. ‘Besides my father, have I met anyone who believed in me and helped me as much? Țițeica did not have Banciu’s enthusiasm, warmth, generosity. I want to remain Banciu’s student and then Felix Klein’s and Richard Dedekind’s, nobody else’s.’ Here he is a bit unfair because Țițeica helped him a lot, but I don’t think he comforted him. He gave him deadlines and Barbilian did not like deadlines. ‘What will I have written in the thesis? Țițeica’s very good appreciation of algebra surprised me. Did I manage to come out of so many numerical calculations? If the detail of the thesis escapes me, the atmosphere of that dusty hall of the School of Bridges and that almost Nordic afternoon, with polarized light, I find again. The geometry thesis passed in the morning still feels like a lived moment today. The algebra thesis remains somewhat hypnotic.’ Let’s not forget they gave them on the same day. I wouldn’t do that today. This atmosphere, that you forget yourself and that it seems like a hypnotic atmosphere while you have a competition, this yes, we can understand. That’s how it was in 1912, that’s how it was later, that’s how it is always. This intensity of a mathematics thesis remains. What’s interesting is something else: how he describes this experience four decades later, it is something remarkable. These are problems he returns to at old age and analyzes from an advanced perspective.”

     

    Mathematician Dan Barbilian and poet Ion Barbu showed that the boundaries between fields are not fixed and that passions can be complementary. And that the human being is both reason and sentiment.

     

     

  • “Certificate of freedom for Oprea Matei”

    “Certificate of freedom for Oprea Matei”

    The Romanian Revolution of 1848 was part of the revolutionary wave that swept across Europe that year and an expression of the affirmation of the Romanian nation state and national identity. Bondage was common in the Romanian Principalities, a form of servitude that has similarities, as well as differences, with serfdom and slavery. It was mainly the people of Roma ethnicity who were subject to enslavement. They were the property of the master, who treated them like any other form of property, and who was to be compensated for if deprived of his property. The Penal Code of 1818 in Wallachia stated that “All Gypsies are born slaves” and that “Gypsies without owner are the property of the state”. There is little information, however, about the origin of the enslavement of the Roma in the Romanian Principalities.

    The collection of the National Museum of History of Romania in Bucharest contains documents about the freedom of Roma from enslavement. One such important document is a certificate of freedom for Matei Oprea. Curator Andreea Ștefan tells us more about its significance in the historical context of that era:

    “The certificate of freedom for Matei Oprea found in the collection of the National Museum of History of Romania speaks to an episode that forms part of a longer historical process in the Romanian Principalities, namely Wallachia and Moldavia, in the 19th century, between its 4th and 5th decade. I’m referring to the reforms that led to the freedom of the Roma slaves. The enslavement of the Roma population in the two principalities was the most important and the most acute social problem the two principalities had to tackle in the middle of the 19th century.”

    Andreea Ștefan tells us about the revolutionary spirit of 1848, influenced by the European politics and culture of the time, quoting the passage about emancipation from the platform adopted in June 1848 by the revolutionary movement in Wallachia, the Islaz Proclamation:

    The liberation of slaves already appears in the document through which they make their platform known, namely the Islaz Proclamation, made public on June 21. The formulation reflects the deep shame that these young intellectuals, educated in the West, the heirs of Enlightenment values, feel at the idea that such an outdated and, above all, completely inhuman social practice is being perpetuated in their country. I quote, therefore, a passage from the text of the Islaz Proclamation: ‘The Romanian people reject the inhumanity and shame of keeping slaves, and declare the freedom of the privately owned Gypsies.’”

    Andreea Ștefan gives us more details about both the attitude and the approach of the revolutionaries of 1848, as well as their responsibility at that time, namely the responsibilities of the Slave Liberation Commission:

    However, we must take into account, on the one hand, the pressure that was hanging over them, and the need to appear as acceptable as possible in the eyes of the population, therefore moderate. On the other hand, we must remember that these young people educated in France all came from the social elite, a social elite which often owned land estates, who earned significant income from the exploitation of the free labor provided by slaves. Just 5 days after the Proclamation of Islaz, on June 26, the body through which this important social reform was to be implemented was created, namely the Slave Liberation Commission. It had two main tasks: to issue freedom certificates and compensation certificates.”

    Andreea Ștefan gives us more details about the Certificate of Freedom for Oprea Matei found in the collection of the National Museum of History of Romania:

    It is a standard form, printed in the transitional alphabet, that is, written in a mixture of Cyrillic letters and Latin letters, and is numbered 19276. Matei Oprea was 10 years old when he received the certificate, and had been in the possession of Ion Ghica. Ion Ghica was also a participant in the Revolution of 1848, and a militant for the liberation of slaves.”

    Andreea Ștefan gives us an overview of the moment of 1848 from the perspective of liberation from slavery on the territory of the Romanian Principalities:

    The 1848 moment is a step back in the process of emancipation of the Roma. The legislation voted by the provisional government is ephemeral, ceasing its validity the moment the government itself ceases its activity.”

    Finally, Andreea Ștefan shares with us some opinions about the effects of those legislative norms from 1848 to the present day:

    The way in which slavery affected the Roma community is extremely complex, profound, with short-term effects, which were felt immediately after liberation, but it also had long-term effects, which we certainly felt during the very tense moment of World War II, during the Holocaust of the Roma community, and which are felt in the tendency to marginalize the Roma community, still present in the community today.”

  • Mathematician Gheorghe Țițeica

    Mathematician Gheorghe Țițeica

    The history of the Romanian school of mathematics begins in the late 1810s, with the establishment, in 1818, of the Polytechnic University of Bucharest under the name of  Higher Technical School. Here and in other higher education institutions established later, entire generations of Romanian engineers and mathematicians were trained. One of the names that made history in the development of mathematics in Romania is Gheorghe Țițeica.

     

    He was born in 1873, in Turnu Severin, a city on the Romanian bank of the Danube Gorge, and passed away in Bucharest in 1939, at the age of 66. From an early age, he showed a great interest in mathematics and the so-called “hard sciences”, that is, the formal sciences and the natural sciences that are based on methodological rigor, accuracy and objectivity. He was the first to be admitted to the Bucharest Normal School, the future PolytechnicUniversity, and studied mathematics at the Faculty of Sciences in Bucharest. Among the professors at the University of Bucharest, he was closest to mathematician and astronomer Spiru Haret, the most important reformer of the Romanian education system.

     

    In 1895 he graduated in mathematics and the following year he went to study in Paris. He specialized in differential geometry. Țițeica wrote about networks in a space with “n” dimensions and introduced new classes of surfaces, curves and networks. He issued the “five-lei piece problem” or “Țițeica’s theorem”, and the concepts of “Țițeica surface” and “Țițeica curve”. He also dedicated himself to popularizing science and raising the level of mathematical education in Romania. One of his great passions was the “Gazeta Matematica” magazine and he was among the founders of the publication “Mathematics”.

     

    Bogdan Suceavă is a mathematician and writer and an expert in the history of mathematics in Romania. He defines Țițeica’s study period in the West as decisive for his career and and the development of scientific education in Romania: “The first decades of “Gazeta Matematica” are linked to Gheorghe Țițeica’s name. He benefited from scholarships all his life. He grew up without a father. He graduated from the school in Bucharest and in 1896, and, when he arrived in Paris, the first thing he was recommended to do was study at the Ecole Préparatoire. On that first year, he met Henri Lebesgue, who six years later would become the author of a very important chapter in mathematical analysis. Țițeica, being of the human quality we know, followed two sets of courses, those at the École Préparatoire and those at the École Normale. The first year was hell. He coped at the highest level and the question is why was he recommended to take more courses? Between Bucharest and Paris there was a certain difference. In July 1897, he quickly passed the certification exams in differential and integral calculus, mechanics and astronomy, all in a single year. He was first in an extraordinary generation, occasion on which he received a scholarship, plus a fee exemption. This experience would be important at a formative level. He understood very quickly how things were, how he had to prepare, what level the French school was at and where the Romanian school was at, during that time. This was happening before 1900.”

     

    Romania was moving at full speed towards the West and Romanian mathematics was one of the sciences in great expansion. And Țițeica’s generation sought to reduce the huge differences between Western society, the French one being the great model, and the Romanian one. As Bogdan Suceavă also noted, Țițeica met top mathematicians in France and learned from them everything that he brought to Romania: “Who did Gheorghe Țițeica work with? He worked with Gaston Darboux, who at that time was not only dean of the Faculty of Mathematics at the Sorbonne, he was also the author of a four-volume treatise on differential geometry in which the unifying theme is the following: how to choose the most appropriate benchmarks for various problems of differential geometry? The subject he studied was a whole philosophy, he was a very influential author who had many talented students, Țițeica being one of the best. He also studied with Henri Poincaré, Edouard Goursat, Charles Hermite, Émile Picard, Jules Tannery, Paul Émile Appell, the best mathematicians. After which, in 1899, he returned to Bucharest. He would write until 1937, over 100 works. In the last two years he did not work at all. He started collaborating with “Gazeta Matematica” while he was in Paris. The mathematics competition with the same name owes a lot to him. The editorials he wrote during that period described everything, including how the candidates behaved in the oral exams. It’s the kind of comments that no one would publish today, but which Țițeica, did.”

     

    Gheorghe Țițeica could not have become anything other than a university professor, a member of some academies and an honorary doctor of some universities. He was also among the ranks of the Romanian Society of Mathematical Sciences, whose president he was.

  • Victory Road, a journey into the history of a princely street

    Victory Road, a journey into the history of a princely street

    Perhaps the most famous road in Bucharest is Victory Road – an important artery in the center of the capital, which stretches from the United Nations Square to Victory Square (where the Romanian Government building is located) and has a length of 2,700 meters. Victory Road is one of the oldest arteries of Bucharest. Before the reign of ruler Constantin Brâncoveanu (1654-1714, reign between 1688-1714), the artery did not exist, being partly called Brașov Road and another section being known as Big Street. The union of the two roads resulted in today’s street in 1692, opened by Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu under the name of Mogoșoaia Bridge – this was a princely street, ensuring the connection between the prince’s estate in Mogoșoaia and the princely palace near the Old Court, at the end of the street. Thus, the new artery becomes the main road in the capital. It is along this street that boyar houses, churches, inns (which will later become hotels), shops, luxury stores, cafes, restaurants or state institutions would be erected. The street initially had wooden sleepers, and later it was paved with stone. In 1882, the first electric street installations appeared in front of the Royal Palace on Victory Road. The name “Victory Road” was given to this street after the Romanian army made its triumphant entry into the capital on this road on October 8, 1878, after the victory in the War of Independence (1877-1878).

     

    More about the rich history of this old princely street from the coordinator of the Department of Modern and Contemporary History at the Bucharest Municipality Museum, Camelia Ene:

     

    “This name, “Victory Road”, an incursion into the history of a princely street, may seem at first glance, an outdated topic. But it is not, because it is a very important artery of the city, the first south-north axis of this important settlement, loaded with history. Victory Road has a name with a special resonance. It simply refers to the victory that the Romanian armies obtained in 1878, following the War of Independence. But Victory Road is much older. It is the first road traced during the reign of Prince Brâncoveanu, who managed to unite portions of the slums located on winding streets, as foreign travelers said, and go to Mogoșoaia, the place where he built a palace, his personal estate. There had to be a connection between the Royal Court and his house, his residence, but of course it also passed near the houses of his byzades or sons”.

     

    What is the present-day outlook of this road? Camelia Ene compares it to an elegant lady:

     

    “Today, Victory Road is a street that, when we walk on it, burdened with personal problems, we probably forget to see the beauty of the buildings. I consider it an elegant lady because it shows us so many architectural styles that blend together, the taste that the commissioners had for Western architecture. We have eclectic, French, Art Nouveau, baroque, neo, baroque styles. We have so many buildings that simply overwhelm us with their beauty, but also with the fact that they are imposing. Maybe if we stopped in front of one of them and asked ourselves the question – who lived here? When was it built? This curiosity would lead us to search the archives and find out how Victory Road was born. The road was built from south to north. Great families who created this city are people who built the history of this street through the houses that were built, but you should know that some were built on the site of other houses. The street is formed from the front of the Church of Saint Spyridon, from the United Nations Square to Victory Square. It crosses an area with old houses. This is the place where, during the Revolution of 1821, Bimbașa Sava, commander of the Arnauts, mercenaries of Albanian origin, who protected the ruler and the boyars, was killed. Walking along Victory Road we have the CEC Palace on the left, built in 1900 on the site of an old inn, In 1878, after the Romanian army paraded victoriously on Victory Road on October 8, after the War of Independence, its official name was changed to Victory Road”.

     

    Victory Road remains one of the most important landmarks of the capital, from a historical, commercial, architectural and stylistic, political and cultural point of view. On this road we encounter important buildings at local or national level, including the National Museum of History of Romania, the CEC Palace, the Royal Palace (hosting the National Fine Arts Museum), the Romanian Athenaeum, the National Military Circle, the Museum of Collections, the Enescu House and some of the capital’s most luxurious shops or hotels.

  • 145 years of diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy

    145 years of diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy

    An exhibition celebrating 145 years of diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy opened at the National Bank of Romania, after being first staged  at the headquarters of the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament in Rome in October this year. The exhibition brings together photographs, archive documents and old Italian coins illustrating the history of the relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy began in 1879. On December 6, 1879, Italy’s first envoy and minister plenipotentiary Giuseppe Tornielli presented his credentials to King Carol I of Romania. Two months later, on February 15, 1880, the first envoy and minister plenipotentiary of the young Romanian nation state, Nicolae Kretzulescu, presented his credentials to King Umberto I of Italy. Diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy were raised to embassy level in 1964.

    The head of the Diplomatic Archives Doru Liciu tells us more about Romanian-Italian relations in history:

    “We are celebrating this year 145 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy. Our peoples, however, have a history going back more than two thousand years, given our common Latin origin. And it was precisely our shared Latin origins that led to the establishment of the first relations between what would later become Romania and Italy. This then continued into the Middle Ages, when the first Genoese colonies were established on the territory of present-day Romania at the mouths of the river Danube and the Black Sea, and then later during the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance, when Italian travelers to the Romanian lands noticed, as did the Romanian chroniclers, the similarities in the languages spoken by the two peoples owing to their shared Latin origin. Later, during the 18th century, the sons of Romanian boyars and rulers studied at universities in Italy, such as the University of Padua. At the beginning of the 19th century, the first Italian consulates and vice-consulates were established in Iași, in Bucharest and in the Danube ports of Brăila, Galați and Sulina. The revolution of 1848 and the success of the Risorgimento movement aimed at the reunification of Italy represented a model for the Romanian revolutionaries, and Italy played a special role for Romania when, in January 1859, the Romanian Principalities became united, both electing Alexandru Ioan Cuza as their sole ruler. The opinion of the Piedmont Diplomatic Litigation Council was decisive, concluding that, from a legal point of view, Cuza’s election was legal. It argued that the provisions of the Paris Convention of 1858 had been respected because they provided for the election of two rulers in Iași and Bucharest, but did not establish whether this should be one and the same person. So, the favorable opinion of the Piedmont Council represented a legal argument for the recognition of the Union of the Romanian Principalities and the election of Alexandru Ioan Cuza. Relations between Romania and Italy continued to develop. In 1873, Romania opened a diplomatic agency in Rome, and its first envoy, first diplomatic agent, was Constantin Esarcu, an important figure on the Romanian political scene and a founder of the Romanian Athenaeum, to which he left all his wealth after death.”

    Doru Liciu also told us more about the exhibition hosted by the National Bank of Romania and its highlights:

    “We wanted to highlight the most important moments in our relations: the Union of the Romanian Principalities, the recognition of Romania’s independence and the establishment of diplomatic relations, the cooperation and collaboration during the First World War, when Italy and Romania, despite officially being allied with the Central Powers, chose to join the Entente in order to achieve their national ideals of unification. The Romanian Legion was formed in Italy, made up of former prisoners of war from the Austro-Hungarian army, Romanians originating from Transylvania, Bukovina and Banat who campaigned for the union of all Romanians and contributed decisively to the Union of Bukovina and Transylvania with Romania. The exhibition also paid special attention to cultural relations, which flourished in the interwar period following the opening of the Romanian Academy in Rome in the 1920s and of the Humanistic Research Institute in Venice in the 1930s. So, we, here, at the Diplomatic Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, are seeking to promote history as a means of becoming familiar with the past, without being stuck in the past, and trying to understand the present and build a better future.”

    The 145 years of diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy prove, once more, that the values ​that the two countries share, and which are also laid down in the two reference documents present in the exhibition, namely the Joint Declarations on the Strategic Partnership from 1997 and the Consolidated Strategic Partnership from 2008, have an even stronger significance in the current geopolitical context.

  • Zavaidoc

    Zavaidoc

    Every big city or capital has a golden period in its history. Bucharest’s is the interwar period, the golden period of all of Romania, in which the pluralism of ideas, aspirations, freedoms, tastes, and experiences were fully manifested. And the history of music from Bucharest’s golden period also includes Zavaidoc, a very successful urban traditional singer during the 1920s and 1930s.

    His real name was Marin Gheorghe Teodorescu, Zavaidoc was born in Pitești in 1896, and died in Bucharest in 1945, at the age of 48. He was part of a Roma family with a brother and two sisters. His father played the violin and the cembalo, and was a much appreciated urban traditional lautar, players of urban traditional music. Unfortunately for young Teodorescu, he lost his father at the age of 13. Together with his brother and sister, he founded a band, “The Teodorescu Brothers”, and sang, achieving local success. These were the beautiful “la belle epoque” years of the first decade, which would, however, lead to the first great misfortune of the 20th century, the First World War. In 1916, when Romania entered that conflict after two years of neutrality, Zavaidoc was 20 years old. He was drafted into the Romanian army fighting on the Carpathian Line, and was part of the army’s artistic teams that held concerts and performances in hospitals in support of the wounded, together with other artists such as Elena Zamora, Fănică Luca and his band, and the composer George Enescu. The end of the war meant great relief and a great release, and the world was learning to live again after the horrors it had gone through. Zavaidoc and his generation of artists performed without inhibitions and the qualities of his voice are a serious recommendation. Settled in the capital, Zavaidoc collects folklore, sings in the best bars, restaurants and terraces in Bucharest. The mid-1920s also bring him financial prosperity, his records selling very well. His financial success was also due to signing a collaboration with the Columbia record label. His best-known songs will be “Zavaidoc’s Song”, “De cân dân m-a aflat arâmă”, “Foaie verde spic de grâu”, “Pe deal, pe la Cornățel”, “Dragostea e ca o râie”, the latter’s lyrics being reprised by the ethno-blues band Nightlosers in 2010. At the end of the 1930s, Zavaidoc married and had three children.

    The artist’s notoriety was so great that references to his name and habits appeared. Also, romanticized stories circulated, such as that of a love affair in which he was allegedly involved with another famous musician, Cristian Vasile, and his girlfriend Zaraza. Doina Ruști is a novelist whose sources of inspiration are in the Romanian past. Her latest novel is called “Zavaidoc in the Year of Love”, a love story from 1923. Doina Ruși referred to the urban legends and myths about the artist, to his formative years, to the years of glory, the “crazy years” after the Great War, to the period of reinvention and the years of professional setback.

    “There was never any rivalry. Where Zavaidoc sang, Vasile did not have room, and vice versa. I mean, there were really two worlds. That man spoke with sincerity and let me tell you why. First of all, in 1923 Vasile did not exist, he was a child. Then, later, they were different worlds. Vasile played translated music, while Zavaidoc was “the soul of the nation”. So we can never put them together. And then, there is the well-known story with Zaraza, a made up story, which never happened. And about the year in which they say he died, that is, 1946, is a year in which Zavaidoc was not only dead, but also rotting already. But I must say that Zavaidoc was practically in his glory years after the war. The war caught up with him when he came of age. He actually went to school during the war. That’s when he met Enescu, that was his school. And, when he returned from the war, he did not want to return to Pitesti, but simply stayed in Bucharest. He was clearly fascinated by houses and things, he had met people. He stayed in Bucharest and began to dominate music, this is interesting, he began to create a trend. It was the period in which he was breaking away from traditional music and entering urban music, modern music. But after that, when things began to settle down in the interwar world, around 1926, when radio was also came into being, he had almost exhausted himself. I listened to his music from the 1930s-1940s, when, indeed, he sang many songs, but his voice was already tired, it was no longer the one of his youth.”

    Zavaidoc’s existence, matured during the First World War, would end during the other great conflict of the 20th century, the Second World War. In 1941, Romania entered the war alongside Germany against the USSR for the liberation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, and Zavaidoc was called up to arms again. He ended up singing for the Romanian military in Bessarabia and Transnistria. He returned to the country, and during the American air raids of April 1944, his house was hit by a bomb. In December 1944, doctors diagnosed him with “nephritis” which, in mid-January 1945, would bring about his demise.

  • Iconic documents of the Great Union

    Iconic documents of the Great Union

     

     

    The union of Transylvania with Romania on December 1, 1918, Romania’s National Day, has been committed to memory in multiple types of documents and sources. Some of them have become, in the over 100 years that have passed since then, standard points of reference for that great moment.

     

    One of the most famous images of the assembly that proclaimed the union of Transylvania with Romania is a must-see on the National Day celebration. It is displayed in all history textbooks, it is featured in documentary films on the event, and it is displayed in museums and public places throughout Romania. It is a photograph that depicts a crowd of people in the area known as “Horea’s Field”. They are mostly peasants, but a few military uniforms can also be seen. In the centre of the image, an elderly man in a peasant costume is holding a red-yellow-blue flag in his left hand, and his right hand is raised at 45 degrees. Around this character, five or six other people are also seen holding the national flag in their hands, with the colours arranged horizontally.

     

    The recurrence of this photograph is explained by the effort of the communist regime before 1989 to show the peasantry as the main decisive factor of the union. The photograph from Câmpul lui Horea overshadowed another photograph featuring the prominent figure of the Greek Catholic bishop Iuliu Hossu, a political prisoner and the one who read the proclamation of the union.

     

    A second image, just as much presented to the public as the one mentioned above, is a photograph of a group of approximately 50 women and men, peasants from the village of Galtiu, Sântimbru commune, Alba County. Several trees stand in the background, and on the left side we can see a man from the group dressed in black and white national costumes holding the national flag. In the middle, above all of them, there is a banner with the text “Galtiu. Long live the union and Greater Romania”.

     

    The author of the two iconic photographs is Samoilă Mârza, nicknamed “the photographer of the Union”. Romanians owe their only photographs of the Great Union events to Mârza, the two mentioned, but also eight lesser-known ones. Born in 1886, in Galtiu, Mârza graduated from high school in Alba Iulia, and was trained by a photographer in Sibiu. He participated in World War I and was assigned to the topographic and photographic service of the Austrian-Hungarian Army.

     

    At the end of the war, Mârza took three photographs that capture the consecration of the first three-colour flag of the Romanian National Military Council, on November 14, 1918. Four days before the meeting in Alba Iulia, Mârza arrived in his native village, took three photos with his fellow citizens before leaving for Alba Iulia. He carried the bellows camera, the tripod and the glass plates on a bicycle. Due to the weight of the devices and the cloudy weather, Samoilă Mârza took five photos of the meeting, three with the crowd and two with the official stands where the union act was read. In early 1919, Samoilă Mârza published his photographs in an album entitled “The great assembly in Alba Iulia in faces”.

     

    While not equally iconic, the audio documents related to that day are no less important. In 1918, the Greek-Catholic priest Gherasim Căpâlna was 24 years old, and in a 1970 interview preserved in the archives of the Oral History Centre of the Romanian Radio Broadcasting Corporation, he remembered the organisation of the departure to Alba Iulia from the bishopric where he worked:

     

    Gherasim Căpâlna: “The news spread by word of mouth, from village to village, by priests and teachers. It was decided that the meeting should be held on Archangels’ Day, November 8. But the date was changed, and the decision was made, in Arad, that we should go to Alba Iulia on the first day of December. But there, in Alba Iulia, there were so many people that you couldn’t cross to the other side. First, the leaders got organised, and Gheorghe Pop de Băsești was appointed as president of the Assembly. He was the oldest, so he gave orders to every centre, in every county. Vaida-Voevod was the leader for our area, this is where he took shelter. And there was also doctor Theodor Mihali, a Deputy. The main engine, those who organised the assembly, were the priests and the teachers, without them nothing could have been done. They did it, and they did it at the risk of their lives. A special list was put together with the people who wanted to go to Alba Iulia, and we asked for the list so that we could get a train pass for them. The Railways Authority provided us with carriages, we left on Thursday and the meeting was on Sunday. On Friday we were on the road, on Saturday we arrived in Alba Iulia with no less than 100 people. Most of them had nowhere to sleep. They walked around the city and slept leaning against the walls of Alba Iulia.”

     

    The iconic documents of the historic assembly in Alba Iulia on December 1, 1918 also have their own little history, and today we integrate them into the bigger historical picture in order to understand it better. (AMP, LS)

  • The Old Orhei Museum Compound

    The Old Orhei Museum Compound

    The Old Orhei, Orheiul Vechi, in Romanian, is a museum compound on the valley of river Raut, a right-hand side tributary of river Dniester, in Republic of Moldova. The Old Orhei cultural-natural reserve enjoys a special status and is Republic of Moldova’s most important site. Currently a process is ongoing, for the Old Orhei to be included on UNESCO’s World heritage List.

    The compound is made of several dozens of hectares of Orhei medieval town. Orhei is a settlement of the 13th and the 16th centuries. It is known as Old Orhei. We recall initially the settlement was deserted and a new city was established in a different location, bearing the same name, today’s Orhei, a town in Republic of Moldova’s Orhei district.

    Part of the compound are two large promontories, Pestere and Butuceni. Added to them are three smaller adjoining promontories, Potarca, Selitra and Scoc. On the territory of the promontories the ruins of several fortifications can be found, as well as dwelling places, baths, worship sites, that including cave monasteries, dating from the Tartar-Mongolian period, the 13th to 14th centuries, but also from the Moldavian period, 14th to 16th centuries.

    The Old Orhei Compound is a system made of cultural and nature elements, such as a natural archaic landscape, biodiversity, an exceptional archaeological environment, historical-architectural diversity, a rural traditional habitat and ethnographic originality.

    The medieval settlement of Old Orhei saw its heyday several times. During the 12th to the 14th centuries, the period before the Tartar-Mongolian invasion. In the early days of the medieval settlement, the wooden and earth citadel is believed to have been erected in that period of time. The Golden Horde Age of the 14th century, the period the stone fortress dates from. Between the 14th and the 16th centuries, the settlement was included in the Moldavian state, for the town, it was a period of transformation, from an Oriental settlement into a Moldavian town.

    During Stephen the Great’s reign (1438-1504) the stone fortress was repaired, and strengthened. In the 60s of the 15th century, the Orhei citadel was erected. It was a defense centre of the country’s eastern borders against the Tartar invasions. The Tartar invasions in the summer of 1469 prompted Stephen the Great to take measures, in a bid to strengthen the country’s defence capacity along Dniester River, initiating important works, carried in order to build a strengthened citadel in Orhei.

    The archaeological excavations that made possible the discovery of the citadel’s foundation speak about those events. Similarly, the official documents of that time speak about that as well. So, in Stephen the Great’s charter of April 1st, 1470, for the first time the mention is made of a burgrave, that is a military commander of the Orhei citadel. We recall at that time the burgrave had military but also administrative responsibilities of the Orhei district.

    The period of decay begins in mid-16th century and lasts until the early 17th century, when the inhabitants abandon the Old Orhei, moving into the new settlement, today’s Orhei. The stone citadel is destroyed.

    Stefan Chelban is the Reserve’s Head of Archelogy and Ethnography Service. We sat down and talked to Stefan Chelban about the history of the Old Orhei:

    „The Old Orhei is a nature cultural reserve set up in 1968, yet, in time, it has been going through several restructuring and reorganizing processes. The reserve is made of several localities and its purpose is to preserve the region’s natural heritage, but also its cultural heritage.

    Actually, it was one of the main reasons why the reserve was set up. Arguably, it is one of the areas with the biggest number of assets part of the archaeological and ethnographic heritage, but also of assets of the immaterial heritage and such like. So, it is a region where the cultural heritage has been acceptably well preserved, to this day. “

    The Old Orhei’s cave monasteries are part of a cave remains compound. They are located in the lime rocks on the Raut River valley. The compound is extremely attractive in terms of tourism; it includes roughly 350 cave remains, of which around 100 are man-dug rooms, while the remaining 200 are karstic formations, grouped in six compounds. They include well-defined monasteries, underground churches, galleries and cells.

    Here is Stefan Chelban once again, this time speaking about the cave monasteries and about the reserve:
    Track: ”This is likely to be the central point for many, yet the reserve has a lot more to offer. For instance, the ruins of the Tartar city, a city that used to be here in the 14th century, albeit for a short period of time yet worth visiting all the same, that including the ruins of an old mosque which, judging by its surface area, it was allegedly South-east Europe’s biggest mosque.

    Ștefan Chelban also told us something about the Old Orhei museum compound:

    “The Ethnography Museum is a model of traditional architecture, specific for the late 19th century and the late 20th century. This house has been restored, refurbished with EU funds, using only traditional material and techniques.”

    Here is Ștefan Chelban once again, giving us further details on the monastic life of the Cave monastery in the Old Orhei:

    „We understand initially the monastery was inhabited by 12 monks since there are 12 cells by means of which we can tell each cell was individual, so there were 12 monks. We do not know exactly the year when it was built, yet that happened somewhere between 14th to 15th centuries. ”