Radio România Internațional

Category: RRI Encyclopaedia

  • The Romanian Royal Family and its interesting past

    The Romanian Royal Family and its interesting past


    The Hohenzollern dynasty put Romania on the map of modernization, ever since Carol arrived in the Romanian Principalities in 1866. The remarkable domestic feats of success, such as the Constitution of 1866, or the exploits at foreign level, such as Romania’s gaining its state independence in 1878, the proclamation of the Romanian Kingdom in 1881 and the country’s connection to the European economic system, all that laid the foundation of the new kingdom’s progress. Tourism was one of the economic sectors that saw a tremendous progress at that time. The construction of the Pelisor or Peles castles literally meant the birth and the development of the town of Sinaia and of the mountain resorts on the Prahova River Valley. We should also note, though, that the Romanian royal family had a crucial contribution to the development of tourism on the Black Sea coast. Dobrogea became part of Romania in 1878. The region literally provided Romania’s opening to the Black Sea, also whetting Romanians’ appetite for seafaring journeys.

    The historian Delia Roxana Cornea is the author of The Royal residences on the Black Sea Coast. The Romanian Queens’ Dream Homes. The volume provides a detailed account of the Romanian sovereigns’ four residences on the Black Sea Coast. The Royal Palace was one such residence. With details on that, here is the author herself.



    Delia Roxana Cornea:

    It was built between 1905 and 1907, and was designed by architect Pierre Louis Blanc. The residence became operational in the autumn of 1907, when, for the first time ever, Dobrogea saw military maneuvers taking place, under King Carol the 1st’s command and coordination. Shortly afterwards, the city dwellers of Constanta, through Anghel Saligny, at the suggestion of King Carol I, offered Queen Elizabeth, the poet Carmen Sylva, a small pavilion built on the port dam, the so-called Queen Elizabeth’s pavilion, later the Queen’s nest, a venue where, at least until 1914, the city’s entire intellectual elite convened and where lots of literary evenings took place, presided by the queen herself.



    They say walls have a memory of their own. We can also say that about the royal palace, which welcomed great guests within its walls.

    istorian Delia Roxana Cornea :

    The two residences were the witnesses of an event that was very special in the history of the city, they played host to Tsar Nicholas the 2nd’s one-day visit. The photos of the two families are very popular, the Russian imperial family and the Romanian royal family, reunited in the pavilion lying on the Constanta port dam. Unfortunately, the trying times of World War One and especially the Bulgarian-German occupation of Constanta and Dobrogea between 1916 and 1918 caused a lot of damage to both royal residences.



    After 1918, when everything would change, the old royal palace also had a different destination. This time around, its destination had the Romanian monarchy’s coat-of-arms at the center, paying homage to the visionary policy of the two Romanian sovereigns, Ferdinand and Marie, the iconic personalities of then the new Romanian world.



    Delia Roxana Cornea:

    After the war, the old Royal Palace became the Court of Appeal of the Constanta city. The municipality of Constanta offered King Ferdinand and Queen Marie, just as it was specified in the title of the donation, in remembrance of the difficult years of the occupation and on behalf of the forefathers of the motherland, a plot of land made of a several hectares, at the heart of Mamaia resort. It was the very moment when, in effect, the resort of Mamaia was put on the map of tourism. In the following years, almost all families of the well-to-do class wanted to have a holiday house in Mamaia. The royal residence in Mamaia was built between 1924 and 1927 and was made of two separate buildings. We’re speaking about the Royal palace and a small pavilion that was built at the suggestion of Queen Marie, who intended to offer it to Michael. Unfortunately, King Ferdinand never got round to being accommodated in that residence because the construction works were completed in the spring of 1927, and the King died the same year, in the summer.



    The inauguration of the new palace took place on August 22, 1927, with the little, six-year-old king Michael attending the event. In the following period of time, the palace was visited by the royal family and their guests, among whom there was the Greek royal family, to whom the Romanian one was related. But the history of the building would change. With details on that, here is the historian Delia Roxana Cornea once again.



    Unfortunately, the history of that royal residence was changed because of its selling, in 1932, according to a deal the mother-princess, Helen, had with her former husband, King Carol I. From that moment on, the Royal Palace became, in turn, the marine aviation base in Mamaia, then, later, during the communist year, it was turned into a holiday residence for the workers’ class, while in the 1970s the communist authorities redesigned the entire building and turned ii into a Neckermann Club, exclusively destined to German tourists. Just as it was stipulated in the supporting memorandum, it was intended to bring in hard currency, while at that time the one-place nightly accommodation fee at the former Royal Palace stood at 13 USD.



    After 1989, the story of the Royal Palace in Mamaia went on, but those who officially took possession of the palace did not provide appropriate maintenance. The building became derelict and then it was abandoned. However, the building’s upgrading ongoing campaign is a promising one and, in the long run, the city dwellers of Constanta hope to yet again see the palace in its initial grandeur.(EN)




  • “The Romanian Israeli”

    “The Romanian Israeli”

    The History of Jews in the Romanian Principalities in the
    19th century was marked by the fight for national and civil rights. The
    new Romanian state that appeared in 1859 after the unification of Moldova and
    Wallachia provided Romanian citizenship only to Christians, and that came with
    any deriving rights and liberties. The 1866 Constitution enshrined this right
    in the clearest way possible under Article 7: The Romanian citizenship is
    earned and preserved and is lost according to the regulations stipulated by
    civilian legislation. Only foreigners of Christian rite can obtain Romanian
    citizenship. The law, however, stipulated a number of exceptions: those who
    pledged allegiance to Romania could be rewarded with the Romanian citizenship.
    Such was the case of many Jews who in the Romanian Independence War of 1877 -
    1878.


    The forefathers of the Jewish community in Romania came up
    with strong arguments in favor of awarding Romanian citizenship to local
    Jews, such as those who were born in Romania. One of the most illustrious of
    them was doctor and scholar Iuliu Barasch. Born in 1815 in Brodî, in present-day western Ukraine, a province in the
    Austrian Empire at the time, and passed away in Bucharest in 1863 aged 48,
    Barsach was born Yehuda ben Mordechai. He arrived in Romania in 1843, when he
    was 28, more specifically in Călărași, Wallachia, a city on
    the Danube River 120 kilometers southwest of Bucharest. In 1851 he moved to the
    capital of Wallachia where we worked as a doctor. He set up public health
    institutions such as quarantines, hospitals and clinics. He took his medical
    Ph.D. in 1841, and taught medicine in high-schools and special military,
    pharmaceutical and agricultural school. He took an active involvement in every
    aspect of the life of the Jewish community, like all intellectuals of his time.
    He was a great patron of science, evidence of which can be found in his works.
    Barasch was also an important advocate of the modernization of Jewish culture.
    Apart from science articles, his works also include volumes devoted to
    medicine, history, philosophy and hygiene.


    Barasch though it normal to take an active stance in the
    local Jewish media, as well as in the specialized scholarly literature. For
    someone as vocal and militant of Jewish rights as himself, the appearance of
    the first Jewish publication in the Romanian language was not out of the
    ordinary. Iuliu Barasch and the Jewish-born French journalist Armand Lévy,
    jointly with Aaron Ascher and Isaac Leib Weinberg, helped bring out The
    Romanian Israeli, which consisted only of a few issues due to underfunding.
    Historian Lya Benjamin, who specializes in the history of Jews, is the author
    of a study about the Romanian Israeli where she highlighted some of the ideas
    of the time.


    It’s interesting because it addresses both Jews and
    Romanians. At the same time it was a platform for advocating the rights of
    Jews. Jews in Romania did not have the Romanian citizenship, and the first who
    militated for that was Iuliu Barasch. He also made use of this newspaper to
    increase his reach. He submitted the first official memorandums to the ruler of
    the Wallachia, Barbu Știrbey,
    in 1856, when a foreign delegation of the Great Powers arrived in the Romanian
    Principalities to prepare the 1858 Conference in Paris. The union of the
    Romanian Principalities was expected to be raised. Barasch wanted to use the
    presence of foreign delegates to militate for Jewish rights and submit his
    memorandum to the ruler. These formal requests were first published in the
    Romanian Israeli.


    What is remarkable about both Barasch as well as all the
    other Jews who militated for the political and civil emancipation of Jews was
    the fact they were attuned to the mentalities surrounding them. The strongest
    idea revolved around the union of the Romanian Principalities, the first
    Romantic project of the Romanian national state. Local Jews fully supported the
    unification, and Barasch spearheaded their efforts. Underlying the nationwide
    mobilization was the appeal to history, and the Jews had their own
    contribution, historian Lya Benjamin explains.


    There was a variety of topics. For instance, the
    publication included articles about history, the history of Romania, about the
    shared history of Romanians and Jews, which showed how far back the Jews are
    documented in Romania. At the same time, it showed aspects of Romania’s history
    so that Jews should get acquainted with the milestones of Romanian history.
    Such is the case of a series about the rule of Michael the Brave. Apart from
    that, there are, of course, articles about what the Jews stood for, about their
    tradition and the specificity of Judaism, so that Romanian readers can get to
    know the history and culture of Jews. At the same time, there were articles
    that expressed the endorsement of Jews for the union of the Principalities and
    their respect for Romanians. Additionally, Jews also commanded respect from
    Romanians and expressed their devotion towards Romanians and Romania.


    The first series of the Romanian Israeli appeared over
    March-September, 1857. Although short-lived, the publication was not forgotten.
    11 years later the second series hit the press. In 1868, after a time of deep
    institutional and societal transformations in Romania, the Romanian Israeli
    was republished in a changed world. (VP)



  • The Museum of Icons on Glass in Sibiel

    The Museum of Icons on Glass in Sibiel

    Located 20 kilometers away from Sibiu, the village of Sibiel became in time a rural site of touristic and heritage interest. Traditionally inhabited by Romanians settled in the vicinity of the big city in southern Transylvania, in the area known as Mărginimea Sibiului, Sibiel is also home to the most important museum of icons on glass in Romania. Masterpieces of naive peasant art, as well as objects of worship, the icons on glass adorned the homes of people in most regions of Romania. And starting at the end of the 1960s, they started being collected by the priest Zosim Oancea to be exhibited in the museum he founded in the courtyard of the Holy Trinity church in Sibiel.



    The current parish priest, Bogdan Flueraș, will next tells us about the biography of Father Zosim and about his creation: “This museum was built by father Zosim Oancea between 1976-1983, in full communist period. He came to Sibiel in 1964, after a period of 15 years of communist detention. In 1965 he rediscovered the painting from the Holy Trinity church in Sibiel and in 1969 he had this special idea to create a museum of icons on glass and thus laid the foundations of the first museum of icons, also in Sibiel, in a smaller building, which he finished in 1973.Then, because the building was too small to serve its purpose, Father Zosim manages to erect the current building. Father Zosim was not from the area of Mărginimea Sibiului. He was born in the village of Alma, also in Sibiu County, but near the city of Mediaș. He taught religion in a school in Sibiu and that’s how he ended up being imprisoned. Afterwards he became a priest in Sibiel where he died.



    Along the years, the Sibiel museum gathered an impressive collection of over 600 icons on glass from all over the country, the oldest dating from the 18th century and the newest from the 19th century. The icons come from the village of Nicula, located in Cluj county, from Mărginimea Sibiului, from Bucovina and the north of Moldavia, from the areas of Brașov and Făgăraş, and also from the west of the country, from Banat.



    Next, the parish priest Bogdan Flueraș will tell us how they got to Sibiel: “These icons belonged to the people of the village before they reached our museum. Father Zosim brought the icons from their houses. Some icons were purchased or donated, but most of them were brought from peoples homes. I could tell you the story of one of the icons in our museum. Father Zosim had a way with the people. He once went to the house of a faithful woman and saw there, on the wall, a special icon. Of course, he asked her to give the icon to the museum, because there it would have more visibility and many other people would be able to admire it. The woman was not very pleased with Father Zosim’s proposal, but still she made a promise to the father: if he managed to collect 99 icons, then her icon will be the hundredth. Of course, Father Zosim quickly collected 99 icons and the woman kept her word and gave the icon to the museum.



    Most of these icons represent the Virgin Mary and Jesus Christ, as well as saints such as Saint George, considered the protector of spring, Saint Elijah, the protector of summer, Saint Nicholas, the patron of winter and Saint Demetrius, associated with the autumn season. Therefore, the icons on glass represent the peasant universe dominated by religious beliefs, and also by the concern for nature.



    The paints and materials used to create the icons are also natural, as we have learnt from the parish priest Bodgan Flueraș: “The peasants used colors that they could find in their households, such as the egg yolk or egg white. The glass used for the icons is also different. At first, icons were painted on a very thin glass, which can be easily seen by visitors. Basically, these icons differ a lot in terms of colors and sizes. For example, the first painted icons were those from Cluj. They are small, have much more sober, much darker colors. But they are equally very beautiful. Then, there are the icons originating from the Sebeș and Alba Iulia area, which have a certain shade of green. The color blue predominates in Mărginimea Sibiului, as well as in the area of ​​Brașov and Făgăraș. In Bucovina and in the north of Moldavia, the yellow color predominates, as well as the green color. We even have an icon, very beautiful, in which Jesus Christ the Savior is painted with a fur waistcoat from Suceva region. This shows that people not only worship and honor icons, but also adapt them to the folk traditions of their area. Thus, in the Cluj area, at Nicula, or in the Mureș Valley, we find that specific headscarf with which the iconographers or peasants adorned the Virgin Mary-Mother of Jesus in these icons. So, the icons can be differentiated according to these details.



    Born in 1911, Father Zosim Oancea died in 2005, and the museum of icons on glass that he established in Sibiel contributed to the transformation of the village into a place of cultural and tourist interest. (LS)


  • The Iosif Berman Photography Collection

    The Iosif Berman Photography Collection

    Photographic art in Romania has developed since mid 19th century. Iosif Berman was one of the most successful photographers in a field that was fundamental for the press: photography for printed newspapers. Photography had a real impact on the development of the press, gradually replacing drawings. And Bermans photos in particular showed the very special skills of the artist and the diversity of topics covered. It was the time when photographs were trying to get everything, the encyclopedic spirit and the keen interest in reality being the cultural foundation of any photographer.



    Berman was born in 1890, in Burdujani, Bukovina, in the north of todays Romania, and died in 1941 in Bucharest. He was born into a Jewish family, and his father fought in the Romanian War of Independence, in 1877-1878, for which he was also decorated. Berman attended high-school in Suceava and wanted very much to be a photographer, and he did more than that: he would become a photojournalist and also the official photographer of the Royal House of Romania, the highest dignity a photographer could aspire to. He was also a member of the team of students in sociology led by Dimitri Gusti, who carried out research campaigns in the rural areas in the 1930s, one of the largest cultural-scientific projects in interwar Romania.



    Journalist Adina Stefan owns an impressive collection of photographs by Iosif Berman, donated by one of his daughters, Luiza Berman. Adina Stefan answered a question frequently asked about how the artist started, since there is no written evidence about Iosif Bermans youth:



    “People have often wondered where he learnt the skills, the photographic art from, since when he came to Bucharest he was so well-prepared, technically speaking. In his native Bukovina, which had been under the Austrian-Hungarian administration, there were many photographers, Jewish in particular, who used to win many prestigious awards at the exhibitions organized in Paris. They would come back to the country, do their job and, of course, those who wanted to learn from them, had every opportunity to do that. So there were many possibilities for Berman to learn the art, and he did not waste any time. Besides, he was an educated man, he spoke French and German even since high-school, and he was also very talented at drawing.”



    Bermans talent as a photographer was quickly noticed, and big daily newspapers, like Adevarul and Dimineata would ask him to work for them. He also worked for foreign institutions, such as the prestigious Associated Press and New York Times, as well as for the Scandinavian Newspaper Press. Just like any other celebrity, Berman got a nickname, that actually spoke of his main quality, the special eye he had as a photographer. Here is Adina Ștefan again:



    “He was called the man with a thousand eyes, because whenever he would go somewhere, together with his crew, before getting to the office he would say: did you notice that, did you see that? There were so many things he would see which nobody else did. And they were all important in illustrating the materials journalists were working on.”



    Leafing through the album titled “Iosif Berman, the master of Romanian interwar photo journalism”, edited by the Romanian National Library in 2013, the reader can easily notice the vitality and diversity of Bermans work. In the chapter “Bucharest, seasons”, unique photos were included, depicting the development of the capital Bucharest since the 1880s. All the main buildings of Bucharest were shot by Berman, either years after their were built, or even during the construction works. There are also photos of the big Kiseleff and Victoria boulevards, images of the offices of the Adevarul and Dimineata newspapers, which he worked for, but the main focus in Bermans photos are people. By looking at them the spectators feel they are carried back in time, feeling the energy of the busy streets of the capital.”



    People from the more disadvantaged categories were also captured by Bermans camera. There are many photos where we can see poor neighborhoods, unpaved streets or streets flooded by rain, pets, people dressed in shabby clothes. But the photographer also caught the merry part of that life too, with its markets, pubs and public spaces.



    His own art could not be missing from Iosif Bermans pictures. It is a self-referential artistic process used in other arts as well, including photography. We mentioned photographs of the Adevărul and Dimineata newspapers as a reference to his own profession, that of a photojournalist. But he also photographed other photographers, like the one in Cișmigiu park and the two men, a woman and a dog in front of the lens, creating a truly iconic pose. No less iconic is the photo in which two “strolling” photographers, as Berman calls them, with mini-cameras, are photographing the streets while “on duty”. (MI)

  • Romania’s troubled history in the early 19th century

    Romania’s troubled history in the early 19th century




    The
    Revolution led by Tudor Vladimirescu was held in the first part of the year
    1821, actually over February and May. It led up to the end of the Phanariot
    reigns in Wallachia and Moldavia. Its leader, later on, gained the status of a
    mythical character, thanks to the revolution he led. Tudor Vladmirescu is
    oftentimes mentioned in history textbooks; he has been immortalized through
    statues and paintings. However, the real character is less well-known by the
    lay public, at once being an interesting, even controversial character. The
    Revolution led by Tudor Vladimirescu in Wallachia was intertwined with the
    Greek revolution of liberation from the Ottoman Empire. Vladimirescu’s
    connection to the Eteria, the secret society that actually started the Greek
    revolution, eventually led to his assassination. Born into a family of freeholders, mosneni,
    in Romanian, in Gorj County, through his skill and adaptation capacity, Tudor
    Vladmirescu gained the status of an estate agent; in turn, he was a merchant
    and a purveyor of the Tsarist army, a rank similar to that of officer, a rank he
    gained during the Russian occupation of 1806 and 1812. The reasons underlying
    the outbreak of the unrest also included personal ambitions as well as the need
    of several political changes. His activity depended on the collaboration with
    the Eteria, but also on the hope of a military assistance provided by the Russians, which,
    even though it had not been promised, it was also expected by the Greeks. The
    historian Tudor Dinu, in his recently launched work titled The Greek
    revolution of 1821 on the territory of Moldavia and Wallachia, provided a
    detailed account of the personality of Vladimirescu and of the underlying
    reason of his collaboration with the Eteria revolutionaries led by Alexandru Ypsilanti. Also, the book highlights the purpose for which Tudor Vladimirescu
    started his revolt.

    Here is the historian Tudor Dinu himself, with details on
    all that.

    Tudor played a key part in the Eteria fighters’ plans. As early as 1820,
    when the Eteria revolutionary warriors convened in the town of Ismail to set up
    the general plan of the revolution, they said that in Wallachia, the revolution
    was to be started by a one Tudor Vladmirescu, whom they deemed as the
    commander of the armed men in Craiova.


    The
    Eteria revolutionaries sponsored Tudor Vladimirescu and thought he could be a
    manageable tool in their hands. But they couldn’t have been more wrong, just as
    the great boyars got it all wrong, who wanted to wind him round their little
    finger. He could be, in my opinion, the most impressive example of a self-made
    man in our history: a commoner, who believed in his star, trying to overcome
    his condition in a brilliant manner, going at all lengths for his career, first
    worming himself into the boyars’ favor, then going into trading very
    successfully, first, on behalf of this and that boyar, later, for himself,
    getting a position in administration, all that culminating with a military
    career. Gaining acceptance to the Russian consul’s entourage, collaborating
    with the Eteria, he went as far as hoping to obtain the reign in a new system,
    he even hoped for the toppling of the social order in the Principalities, which
    could have been made possible though the liberation brought by the Russians.
    The Greek sources provide many new things, in this respect, stating that the
    Eteria revolutionaries promised Tudor they would get him seated on Decebalus’ s
    throne.


    However,
    irrespective of the reasons, Tudor Vladimirescu and his army succeeded to
    destabilize the Phanariot order, also gaining the support of a relevant part of
    the domestic boyars’ class, reaching as far as the princely court in Bucharest.
    Meanwhile, the Eteria revolutionary warriors led by Alexandru Ypsilanti had
    penetrated Moldavia. There they were trying to muster an army made of locals,
    hoping the population in the Romanian principalities would rise up, on a large
    scale, against the Ottomans. Part from the political changes did the
    revolutionaries consider social changes as well?

    Historian Tudor Dinu:


    The most radical, to that effect, socially but also
    politically, was Alexandru Ypsilanti. In his political program, Alexandru
    Ypsilanti stipulated, for instance, the existence of indigenous rulers, but
    also some sort of constitutional monarchy, with the rulers’ incomes being
    checked by an early parliament of the Romanian Principalities. As for Tudor, he
    also had important proposal in the social field meant to improve the lives of
    commoners, yet they were not as radical as they were presented to us. For instance,
    he proposed, among other things, that certain taxes be reintroduced. It goes
    without saying he also had some very interesting suggestions. The most
    important one, for the development of commerce, was the dismantling of domestic
    customs, by means of which products brought from another city were very
    expensive. Also, Tudor proposed the equal decrease in revenues for bakers and
    butchers, so that bread, but also meat, could be affordable. There also was
    another proposal, perhaps the most radical one, but impossible to implement:
    the merit-based ascription of high-office dignities, something that could not
    be implemented, and as for the system of corruption, it could not disappear,
    given that Tudor himself pleaded for the income reduction in the case of
    high-office dignitaries.


    Despite
    the long-term intentions, the situation on the ground was not a happy one. The
    Eteria Army’s crossing of the Romanian territories wreaked havoc and meant
    plundering and unrest carried by the local population. Moreover, the looming Ottoman
    invasion ran the risk of yet again turning the Principalities into a war
    theater, what with the fact that the eagerly-awaited Russian assistance failed
    to appear. Under the circumstances, Tudor Vladimirescu initiated a risky
    diplomatic action, meant to protect the country, but also his past success; he
    tried to negotiate with the Sublime Porte in Istanbul. However, Alexandru Ypsilanti
    learned about those attempts and considered Tudor a traitor.

    Historian
    Tudor Dinu:


    Maybe the most important
    accusation count is a letter Tudor sent and which fell into the Sultan’s hands.
    In that letter he expressed his wish to wage war against Ypsilanti the
    traitor, provided the High Porte gave him some assistance. But that was not
    possible. The High Porte could not offer military assistance to a mutinous
    Christian. It may very well be that Tudor was extremely clever, in his bid to
    maintain good relations with the Turks, refraining from going against
    Ypsilanti. Also, Tudor kept a last-ditch hope alive that the Russian army might
    come. He
    had been given assurance, via numerous channels, that is why he was slowing things
    down a little bit. But from the viewpoint of the Eteria revolutionaries, that
    was treason.


    Accused
    of treason, Tudor Vladimirescu stood trial according to Eteria’s Criminal Code.
    He was sentenced on the grounds that he went against Eteria’s motherland,
    Greece, even though Tudor’s motherland was definitely Wallachia. That is why
    his trial and subsequent execution are, even to this day, rated as inequities,
    by the Romanian historical research and public opinion. For the Romanian Principalities,
    the revolution would come to an end once with Tudor Vladimirescu’s death on May
    28, 1821. As for the Eteria revolutionaries, they would continue their fight
    against the Ottomans on the territory of Wallachia, until their defeat in
    Dragasani in early June. Here is historian Tudor Dinu once again, this time
    speaking about the effects of the 1821 revolutionary year on Wallachia and
    Moldavia.

    Tudor Dinu:

    For the Romanian Principalities, the Greek revolution was catastrophic, because, in the wake of the
    Greek revolution, the Romanian principalities were completely devastated. The
    Romanians’ sacrifice was an exemplary one. One or two decades were needed for
    the Romanian Principalities to recover from such a devastation. Then a
    Russian-Turkish war followed. In another move, the role the 1821 Revolution
    played was fundamental, since it marked the Romanian principalities
    definitively falling within the West’s orbit, even though the process had begun
    in 1812. It took shape and was to be completed at the level of the elites, and
    not at the level of the Romanian peasant, who, in the 19th century,
    still lived according to ancestral rhythms. Such a sacrifice was necessary, so that Romania could find its place on
    the map pf Europe, and not on that of the Ottoman Empire. (EN)



  • The early days of photography in Romania

    The early days of photography in Romania



    Western foreigners who travelled to Romania and settled here brought the art and craft of photography with them. In the mid-19th century, photography became popular rather quickly. After the 1850s, actually, the Romanian photography market boomed, with photo studios cropping up in every major city, and with a clientele eager to benefit from the new services. Foreign photographers made history in Romania. Their legacy is an important documentary source about how the cities and the people looked like, at that time. Carol Popp of Szathmary, Franz Mandy, Franz Duschek, Adolphe A. Chevallier are some of the noted foreign photographers of the 19th century. However, the Romanians Ioan Spirescu and Iosif Berman are also among the pioneers of Romanian photography.



    One of the most prolific Romanian photographers was Stelian Petrescu. He left a great number of photo films and photographs. Petrescu was born in Giurgiu, in 1874, into a well-to-do family and died in Bucharest, on July 23rd, 1947. For his secondary education, Petrescu took a math and sciences track, being attracted by science in primary school. Then he graduated from the Faculty of Chemistry and Physics Sciences in Bucharest. Petrescu was appointed teacher with the Gheorghe Șincai high-school. In a couple of years time he went to Germany to get a second degree, in Geodesy. Stelian Petrescu returned to Romania in 1901. He resumed his teaching activity and had a stint with the Higher Vocational School in Iasi. In 1909 Petrescu was employed as an engineer with the Romanian Railway Company and kept his job until he retired, in 1930. Stelian Petrescu never renounced his teaching profession. Concurrently, he taught sciences in Bucharest.



    One of the greatest events in the early 20th century was the Jubilee Exhibition staged in 1906 in Bucharest. The exhibition was meant to pay tribute to Carol I of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringens four decades of reign, which began in 1866. The exhibition was mounted according to a French pattern. It benefitted from the attention of all domestic institutions, also enjoying international presence.



    The exhibition was also an opportunity for photographers to make themselves visible. Attending were renowned names of that time, such as those of Alexandru Antoniu, Franz Mandy or Adolf Klingsberg, the owner of the famous “Julietta” photo studio in Bucharest. Less well-known names also participated, such as Marko Klein, the owner of a photo studio in Braila. Petrescu also participated and even scooped the 1st prize and the gold medal, Based with the National Library of Romania, the historian Adriana Dumitran documented Stelian Petrescus passion for photography, as well as his presence at the Jubilee Exhibition in 1906.



    Adriana Dumitran:



    “His first presence in a major international exhibition was in 1906, at the Romanian General Expo, where he represented the School Department. His participation was noted by the media. He showed photographs with military themes, Romanian landscapes, portraits, animals. He had quite a large number of works on display, although we dont know precisely how many.” Stelian Petrescu rose to fame, his talent was in high demand and he started looking for more areas in which he could use his knowledge.



    Adriana Dumitran again:



    “He started working with the Committee on Historical Monuments. In 1908, when the Committee launched a Bulletin, he had his works published there at least until World War I, in several issues until 1912. He worked a lot with architect Nicolae Ghica-Budești and illustrated a number of books, including, in 1909, an album on the religious artefacts at the Probota monastery, and that same year another one on items from the Neamț and Secu monasteries. One of his most interesting contributions was photographing the paintings of Nicolae Grigorescu for a monograph by Alexandru Vlahuță devoted to this great painter, in 1910.”


    Stelian Petrescu remained a scientist nonetheless, and this was evident in his newfound passion for photography.



    Adriana Dumitran:



    “His interest in the railways converged with photography. In 1913 he published a visual guide of the Romanian Railways. At that time, România had 3,500 km of railways crossing the entire country. He travelled that distance, took photos, illustrated this guide with them, and for each railway hub he presented the cultural, historical and other landmarks. The guide features over 350 photographs.”



    He also continued to photograph major public events. On 16th October 1922, he took snapshots of King Ferdinand, Queen Marie and senior politicians at Bucharests Arch of Triumph.



    After his retirement in 1930, he published his photos in technical magazines. He switched to a modernist style, with photos of railway construction hall interiors, engine components, bearings and other pieces used in the railway industry. He photographed the Malaxa Plant and published an album with the products made there. He was regarded as a “niche” photographer, and his work remains to this day of exceptional value for the history of industry in Romania. (EN, A.M.P)




  • Urbanizing Dambovita River

    Urbanizing Dambovita River

    The capital city of Bucharest is crossed, northwest to southeast, over a length of 22 km, by Dambovita River, flanked to the north by its Colentina tributary, and by its south by Arges. The river Dambovita issues from the Fagaras Mountains, has a length of 237 km, and has a drop in altitude of 1,757 m. After it leaves the capital city, it flows into Arges river by the village of Budesti. The river’s name can be confusing, since an entire county in Romania is called Dambovita, with a seat in the city of Targoviste, the old medieval capital of the principality of Wallachia.



    The first document mention of the present capital, Bucharest, dates back to the 15th century, the time of Prince Vlad the Impaler. It used to be referred also as the fortress of Dambovita. The inhabitants took full advantage of the sinuous river, using its water for their households. The first public water sources were built during the reign of Alexandru Ipsilanti, in the late 1790s, when the first water distribution networks were built. Back then, the streets of Bucharest were roamed constantly by water vendors, to provide the inhabitants with water before the running water network was put into place. However, the river had its quirks, because the locals had to face periodic flooding and miring in various neighborhoods.



    When the modern Romanian state formed in 1859, setting its capital in Bucharest, the river Dambovita had to be tamed and urbanized. Following the example of great European capitals, such as Paris, London, or Berlin, Romanian engineers put together plans to integrate the river into the city, removing natural hazards. The first attempts at taming the river were under Prince Ipsilanti, in 1775,when a canal was built to curb the effect of flooding. In 1813, under Prince Caragea, the riverbed was dredged. However, the real change came after 1878, after Romania gained independence from the Ottoman Empire. Starting in 1880, based on the plans drawn by engineer and architect Grigore Cerchez, the course of the river was stabilized in the city, its bed deepened, and the banks were consolidated, trees were planted lining the banks, and bridges were built.



    However, the most ample urban project was run after the great earthquake of March 4, 1977. Back then, President Ceausescu ordered the central area of Bucharest changed, with an overhaul of the Dambovita as part of the project. Historian Cezar-Petre Buiumaci with the Bucharest Municipal Museum, told us about the ambitious project: “In the grand project to overhaul the center of the city, which Ceausescu ordered after the earthquake of March 4, 1977, the Dambovita river played a big part. The grand project of the Civic Center in the capital, whose first sketches appear after the earthquake, was a brutal and unprecedented intervention. It meant razing the central area of the city, thus far a mostly residential area. The loss of these homes meant creating living spaces for the dislocated people. Bucharest became a huge building site, not only in the center, but also in the areas that would be the site for building the huge concrete blocks to shelter the homeless. One such area was the building ensemble in Cringasi-Constructorilor-Giulesti, meant to house 45,000. In parallel, the entire course of the river within the capital Dambovita was overhauled.



    Ceausescu used older ideas, which aimed at making the river Dambovita navigable, integrating it into an ample project meant to turn Bucharest into a Danube port by linking the great river to the river Dambovita. Here is the explanation provided by Cezar-Petre Buiumaci: “This overhaul, aimed at creating the Bucharest- Danube canal, was based on much earlier ideas, from the 19th century, which were attempted periodically since then. In order to carry out this project, storage lakes were built at Ciurel and Vacaresti, meant to increase water volumes and create a navigable environment. The geography, however, did not agree with this, and the idea of navigating within the city was dropped in favor of navigating at the edge of the city, in the Vitan-Catelu area.



    The new Dambovita had a totally different face. In order to remove for good the threat of flooding, and to make it useful for irrigation, Dambovita was floodgated 20 km from its source, and 80 km before it entered Bucharest. The third flood gate was right in Bucharest, forming behind it the so-called Mill Lake, Lacul Morii. Before entering the city, a branch was dug, coursing south, in order to diver the water surplus towards the Ciorogarla river. The urban course of Dambovita was dug into, and two collection canals for waste water were built. The bridges were rebuilt, and some were relocated. Here is Cezar Buiumaci: “The overhaul of the Dambovita was complex. Not only was the riverbed reconstructed, but also an entire crisscrossing network, with installations to maintain a relatively constant flow. In addition to building new bridges and walkways across the river, certain segments now have promenade places such as pontoons. Part of this set-up is the swimming area in Cringasi lake, close to Ciurel lake.“



    If the present aspect of Dambovita River is of recent making, its history goes back at least 200 years. (CC)

  • A victim of communism: Gheorghe Ene Filipescu

    A victim of communism: Gheorghe Ene Filipescu

    For some years, the writer and Anglicist Monica Pillat has undertaken to reconstruct her family’s recent history. The granddaughter of the poet Ion Pillat, she is related on her father’s side to the Brătianu family, from among whose ranks hailed some of Romania’s greatest politicians. Her foray into her family’s history began with a biography of her father, Dinu Pillat, a leading inter-war intellectual who spent time in the communist prisons in the early 1960s because he wrote a novel whose theme was not to the liking of the Communist Party.



    In 2021, Monica Pillat published a book about her family on her mother’s side, focusing on her grandfather, Gheorghe Ene Filipescu. Born in 1884, the latter hailed from a poor peasant family. When he was very young, he left barefoot from Oltenița to Bucharest to find employment, although he still didn’t know how to read or write. He was hired as an apprentice in a shoe making workshop and years later would himself open his own luxury shoe workshop on Calea Victoriei, in the very centre of the capital city. In 1929, Gheorghe Ene Filipescu won an important award in Barcelona in recognition of his achievements, and, back home, he was elected president of the Professional Trade Union of Shoe Makers in Romania. He also became a member of Parliament on behalf of the Social Democratic Party.



    Horia Roman Patapievici tells us more about this fascinating figure:


    He is the embodiment of a success story from inter-war Romania. He was a man who started out from the bottom of the ladder and rose through decency and talent. We recognise in his rise the fulfilment of a person in a society that allowed him to start from nothing only to reach the country’s elites. It’s important to note this fact, that the elites were also made up of people who started from very low, like Gheorghe Ene Filipescu. It’s the history of a man who embodies everything we like, that attracts us and continues to fascinate us about inter-war Romania, a country where there was both good and bad but where freedom allowed for beauty to come to the fore.



    Starting from his own life experience, Gheorghe Ene Filipescu wanted to help others through his political involvement. Horia Roman Patapievici also spoke about this aspect of his biography:


    I used to be prejudiced about Gheorghe Ene Filipescu’s being a Social Democrat and cherishing the word socialism. But he helped me understand that you can view and experience socialism so that its outcome, and in my opinion the outcome is always denial of freedoms, misery and eventually terror, to appear in a different light. He was a poor man who embraced the socialist cause when he was very young. The book contains two texts dictated by Ene Filipescu to his daughter Cornelia Pillat, Monica Pillat’s mother. One, dating from the summer of 1936 and published in a brochure in 1938, it’s called A voice from among the people to the elites. His speech in Parliament is called Remarks on crafts. So, that’s what his socialism looked like, although he ended up being killed by the socialists, not his type of socialists, but others who claimed to espouse the same principles. So Gheorghe Ene Filipescu’s socialism is about access to prosperity through hard work, freedom for the crafts, opportunities for craftspeople to amass wealth through ownership of property and by giving profit a role in the social order. Filipescu very clearly rejected the denial of freedom and the control of thoughts, he explicitly condemns this in his 1938 brochure. Filipescu’s socialism is the socialism of the craftspeople, of the freedom of the craft, of the superiority that comes from hard work. A superior man in his opinion is someone who enhances what he has received and who produces more than he was given.



    Despite his adhesion to the socialist cause, the communists, who came to power after 1947, sent Filipescu to prison as part of a process aimed at cleansing inter-war institutions. Horia Roman Patapievici explains:


    Filipescu was arrested in 1949. He was suffering from tuberculosis and diabetes, but was thrown in prison by the extermination regime. Let me quote from Monica Pillat’s book: ‘Two days after grandfather was interned at Târgu Ocna, on 19 February 1952 major Al. Roșianu ordered that a file of informative action be opened against the political detainee Filipescu so as to establish the following: his behaviour and political convictions throughout his detention at the penitentiary, because during the trial that took place on 16 January 1952 at the Bucharest Military Tribunal he was unfriendly towards the Soviet Union and our democratic regime, openly saying he did not agree with the politics of our regime in the People’s Republic of Romania.’ When he was invited to say his last word, he did not apologise, instead he accused his accusers, saying not that he is not guilty but that they are wrong. And that’s what’s truly impressing: he retained his dignity in prison and remained faithful to himself and the ideas he had openly expressed.



    Gheorghe Ene Filipescu died in prison in 1952 and his body was thrown into a mass grave in Târgu Ocna.


  • The Public Library in Constanța

    The Public Library in Constanța


    1878, when northern Dobrudja became part of the Romanian Kingdom, also marked the beginning of a process of westernisation of this Black Sea region, so as to catch up with the rest of the country. This also involved the establishment of modern cultural institutions, alongside political ones. The public library in Constanța was one such an institution, its foundation being linked to one of the most influential journalists and cultural figures from this Black Sea port city, namely Petru Vulcan, who was born in 1866 and died in 1922. With the celebration of the 90th anniversary of the Constanța Public Library in 2021, a tribute was paid to Petru Vulcan, the librarys founder. Librarian Corina Apostoleanu tells us more about the biography of Petru Vulcan:



    “Petru Vulcan ended up in Dobrudja after an interesting, even adventurous, journey. He has Aromanian origins and was not born on the territory of present-day Romania, but he became very attached to Constanța and the whole Dobrudja region. He became employed as a public servant in Constanța at a time when the city was just beginning to modernise and was nothing like the city we see today. It is in this capacity as a public employee that Vulcan embarked on an ambitious project to establish a literary and cultural magazine in the Romanian language, the first of its kind in Dobrudja, which he called Ovidiu, after the Latin poet, thus emphasising the Latin connections of these parts and the links with Ovid, who was banished here from Rome. Another project initiated by Vulcan was the creation of a literary circle, a daring endeavour in a city with a small Romanian population and with no formal education system and very few intellectual elites. He did not stop here, but embarked on a third project, namely the foundation of a public library.”



    Petru Vulcan did manage to establish a public library in Constanța, but the project was short-lived, as books were still considered luxuries and modern cultural life was in its early days, librarian Corina Apostoleanu explains:



    “The library opened with a lavish ceremony in Independence Square, todays Ovid Square. Unfortunately, the library didnt last long. The magazine, however, survived until 1910, both with and without Petru Vulcan. Towards the end of the 19th century and in the 1930s, when the modern concept of the public library was truly born, a series of fresh attempts were made in the form of reading circles for different professional groups, from public servants to port workers, lawyers and teachers, etc. School libraries were also set up in the more important education institutions. All this gave new impetus to Petru Vulcans older project to establish a public library in the city. Teachers had an important role to play, putting pressure on the local authorities and the city hall, insisting that the city needs a public library.”




    It wasnt, however, until July 1931 that the local authorities signed the decree for the establishment of the county library in Constanța. The librarian Corina Apostoleanu tells us why the library is today named after Ioan N. Roman:



    “Ioan N. Roman was one of the citys leading intellectual figures at the time. He was a lawyer, but also wrote poetry under the pen made Rozmarin and his name appears in many periodicals from Dobrudja. He died in 1931 and one his houses would be loaned by his family to the citys library to be used as its headquarters. Carol Blum, another leading intellectual figure from Constanța, was the first librarian, although he wasnt paid for the job. In the 1950s, he moved to Israel, where he gained recognition for his academic research and where he became a member of the Israeli Academy. Back to Constanța, the public library slowly began to build a collection thanks to large donations and its own purchases. A regulation was published and the opening hours were established, so a modern library was created.”



    When the communist regime came to power in 1947, the county library in Constanța entered a new stage, one marked by censorship, with a large section of its collection becoming unavailable to the public. All that changed in 1990, following the collapse of the communist regime. The venue hosting the library at this time was given back to the Archbishopric of Constanța, and a new, modern building was erected for the purpose of hosting the library, the first, in fact, in Romania to be designed with this aim in mind.


  • Female historical characters in Romanian communist-era films

    Female historical characters in Romanian communist-era films

    Like all dictatorial regimes, either on the right or on the left, historical films were also a means of propaganda in communist Romania. Films were supposed to reflect the nationalist-communist ideology of the day, with all its distortions of history and omissions of facts. Films during the communist era also served an educational purpose, instilling a certain view of national history and brand of patriotism in entire generations of Romanians.



    From 1974 onwards, added emphasis was placed on the involvement of Romanian cinema in the propaganda project of the communist party with the aim of creating the New Man and forging the so-called “multilaterally-developed socialist society and a socialist nation”. The films produced during this period explored a variety of subjects, from the Dacian-Roman society and the Middle Ages, which saw the consolidation of the Romanian principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, to the 19th and 20th centuries, while making no mention of the contribution of the monarchy to the modernisation of the Romanian state.



    Filmmakers involved in such productions included Mircea Drăgan, Gheorghe Vitanidis, Doru Năstase, and, especially, Sergiu Nicolaiescu, the most prolific and “most effective director of historical films that consolidated and fed the nationalist-communist mythology”, as professor Mihaela Grancea described him. But how were female historical characters portrayed in this cinematic world dominated by men? Were these women portrayed in a realistic style, despite scarce historical information about the wives, mothers and daughters of the princes and rulers, or were they merely embodiments of the ideology of the day? Professor Mihaela Grancea, who teaches at the Lucian Blaga University in Sibiu, explains:



    “In most of these films, women had only brief and exotic roles. In Michael the Brave, which is perhaps the best-known Romanian historical film, women only make brief appearances in the guise of Lady Stanca and Michaels former lover, who helped him forge a number of foreign relations that enabled him to borrow money. Male stereotypes were dominant in these films. Women were, for the most part, absent, an absence that is very conspicuous especially in the films of Sergiu Nicolaescu. In his productions, the scrips of which he wrote himself or together with en vogue historians, he reduced as much as possible the presence of women from the higher ranks of the two principalities in historical productions.”



    There is, however, one exception: a film by Malvina Urșianu called The Return of the Banished, from 1980, based on a novella by Costache Negruzzi entitled Alexandru Lăpușneanu. The film, which is set during the second, tragic reign of this Moldavian prince, stands out for the presence of two powerful women: Lăpușneanus wife, Ruxandra, and the latters sister, Lady Chiajna, who at the time was dominating the domestic political life. The two sisters, who were themselves the daughters of ruler Petru Rareș and the granddaughters of Stephen the Great, were regents while their sons were still underage. Professor Mihaela Grancea tell us more:



    “The two women have different personalities, something the film emphasises. The plot follows Ruxandras psychological development, as she transforms from an apathetic, unenthusiastic person. As her husband Alexandru Lăpușneanu is gripped by paranoia, we see how Ruxandra becomes increasingly distant and starts being more concerned with the conservation of her status and that of her children. She takes the decision therefore to poison her husband, something that did not happen in reality, or at least, historical records are fairly ambiguous in this respect. In the film, however, just like in Negruzzis novella, she poisons Alexandru Lăpușneanu and puts her son Bogdan on the throne, while she becomes his regent.”



    Lady Chiajna is the other powerful feminine presence in the film, also the daughter of Modavian ruler Petru Rareș and the wife of Wallachian voivode Mircea Ciobanul. Lady Chiajna was the subject of other literary works, as well, being a symbol of cruelty and ambition, a kind of counterexample to the model of docile and gentle femininity that was so widespread in history. In Malvina Urșianus film, Lady Chiajna embodies the very characteristics for which she is known in history books and literature, says professor Mihaela Grancea:



    “Lady Chiajna is a stereotypical character. She is meant to appear arrogant and lacking in subtlety. She embodies, however, some of the real extraordinary power of this woman who imposed her will at a time of great political upheaval, with the 16th century being full of such political crises and lots of cruelty. Neither did Chiajna die early or in a dramatic way, as did the lady of Moldavia, who died at 32 years of age due to natural causes. The film is extraordinary for its choice of colour, expressive cinematography and the accuracy of historical reconstruction. In the stage design, we note a similarity to Shakespearean productions, such as Orson Welles Macbeth.”



    Investigations into womens presence in Romanian historical films from the point of view of historical truth are still in their early days, but they are undoubtedly bound to continue.


  • Education for the grassroots in modern Romania

    Education for the grassroots in modern Romania

    Romania’s rural community centers are associated with the communist propaganda according to the Romanian collective imaginary, which also associates such establishments with the village’s off-the-record disco parties, improvised occasionally and somehow going against the law. Yet the history of such cultural establishments goes back in time, before the communist regime. Initially, the rural community centers were part of a wide-scope effort which also included propaganda as well as education, in the broader sense of the word. To put it briefly, we shall soon be marking a hundred years since the rural community centers have been established in Romania in 1923, under the aegis of then the Royal Foundations, at that time a leading public cultural institution. Our guest today is historian Razvan Andrei Voinea. Here he is, speaking about the eventual aim of the community centers in the inter-war years.



    It was also a propagandistic aim. We found it very interesting to analyze that nationalistic-monarchic discourse, mainly after King Carol II came to power and after the implementation of that kind of royal dictatorship after 1938. Back in the day the propaganda was made with the purpose of awakening the national consciousness. By all means, there were indeed a lot of measures implemented to increase the role of religion, to enhance the image of the monarchy in the traditional imaginary, and that was obvious especially after 1934. No more than 100-150 community centers had been set up until then, but as soon as sociologist Dimitrie Gusti became the head of the Royal Foundations, almost 2,000 community centers were established between 1934 and 1938. It’s fascinating, I mean, having so very many community centers that were operational all those years. And it was also then that Gusti came up with a great number of measures taken to improve the quality of life in the rural areas. There was a lot more to it than that: there was the economic aspect through scores of programmes implemented so that villagers could find out how they could get richer, then there was the cultural dimension, there also was a healthcare aspect, a very important one, the reformers were trying to implement.



    With no dedicated buildings, the interwar years’ community centers were more like village associations. Here is historian Razvan Andrei Voinea once again, this time speaking about some of the activities carried by such centers.



    The construction of premises was an attempt that was partially accomplished: cattle shelters, public monuments, fountains, lampposts for public lighting. One such example is the public bath (…) ditches were dug, sick people were taken care of, for instance. Speaking about healthcare, they made much of cleanliness and the public baths. Public paths were built, for instance (…) And, during World War Two, funds were raised, as well as stuff for the soldiers on the frontline. (…) An important role was played by the setting up of the libraries. Each community center had its own library. Again, that is important as well. We also need to say that, at that time, the community centers did not have the image they have today, which is fueled by the communist constructions. Usually, in the inter-war years their premises were the school or the town hall. That is why quite a few of them were a hundred percent linked to the village school, or were managed by the priest or the principal. They were the main animators of the cultural activity in the rural areas.



    This first part in the history of the community centers lasted until the instatement of the communist regime and ended with the dismantling of the Royal Foundations, in the same period of time. And it was also back then that the cultural and education activity had seen a new stage.



    Razvan Andrei Voinea:



    First of all, major investments were made in the community centers.(…) A new building could be seen in each and every village across Romania: the community center built after 1948. On the spur of the moment, many of them were placed in the boyars’ residential buildings which were forcibly turned into state property, but afterwards, buildings were erected, based on a series of projects made by the design institutes in the big cities. The activities carried in the new buildings were very diverse, obviously based on the same type of propaganda. Get-togethers were organized, exhibitions were mounted, focusing on the collective farming in the USSR or in other regions across Romania. Peasants were brought to see that exhibition. Then again, a very interesting direction was that of the propaganda through film, which began in 1960. (…) Furthermore, rural theatre troupes were set up. There were hundreds of such troupes all across Romania, and they had a rather rich repertoire (…) As a rule, scripts were written in Bucharest only to be dispatched to various community centers. The troupes there practically acted following those scripts. (…) On Sundays at 11 am, those who went to the community center could see a play. It was the same all around the country, it was based on that script which had the purpose of unifying the cultural discourse.



    Since 1990, community centers in the rural regions have been of no interest for the political decision-makers or the cultural managers of the public institutions, At the moment, of the existing 7,100 village community centers, a mere 125 of them stage specific activities.


    (EN)


  • Historian Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa

    Historian Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa


    Maramures is one of the oldest historical provinces inhabited by Romanians. The Land of Marmures was one of the many medieval state entities in the Carpathian basin and was mentioned for the first time in official documents in 1199.The emergence of the Moldavian feudal state in the early 14th century is very much related to the Romanians in Maramures. Back then, the local ruler Dragos and his troops crossed the Carpathians to the east to form a defence line along the Hungarian border, which would become the nucleus of the Moldavian state.



    The Land of Maramures was incorporated by the medieval Kingdom of Hungary and the local leaders were made nobles. After the Ottoman Empire conquered Hungary in 1526, Maramures became part of the Transylvanian voivodate, and in 1688 became part of Austria. In 1867, after the reform of the Habsburg Empire, and the establishment of Austria-Hungary, Maramures became a part of Hungary. After the first world war, in 1918, the representatives of the Romanians in Maramures voted for the union with the Kingdom of Romania.



    One of the most prominent figures of Maramures was historian Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa. He was born in 1844 in the village of Middle Apsa, which today is part of Ukraine, into a family of Romanians with noble Middle Ages roots. His father had been a governor of Maramures, a revolutionary commissioner during the 1848-1849 revolution and a judge with the Hungarian Royal Court. His elder brother was Victor Mihalyi of Apsa, a bishop of the Romanian Church United with Rome from 1895 until 1918. Ioan followed in his fathers footsteps and studied law at the University of Budapest. In 1869 he got a PhD degree in law, being the first Romanian from Maramures to get such a title.



    “One of Ioan Mihalyi of Apsas eight children was Lucia, born in 1903. In 1993, the Oral History Centre of the Romanian Radio Broadcasting Corporation had the big opportunity to to her, at the age of 91. Lucia Mihalyi of Apsa talked about the roots of her family and the bravery of her grandmother when her husband and other national Romanian leaders were sent to prison for alleged connections with the initiators of the 1948 Revolution. Lucia recalled her grandmothers story about how she was received by the Habsburg sovereign Franz Joseph.



    My great grandfathers name was also Ioan Mihaly and he had 7 children. My grandfather was detained for supporting the revolutionaries. My grandmother, Iuliana Nan, went to Franz Joseph and requested an audience, as some of her nieces were court ladies there. She told Franz Joseph that my grandfather was not part of the revolutionaries group, he had just talked to them. Iosif Man, the last Romanian prefect in Maramures, talked to the revolutionaries coming from Baia Mare and intended to commit atrocities, as they had done in Transylvania. In Maramures the revolution was not bloody. Franz Joseph told my grandmother that he could not release them. And my grandma said: “What kind of emperor are you, if the Hungarians are not listening to you?” And Franz Joseph said that nobody had talked to him like that. Two weeks later, they were all released.



    In the Hungarian capital, Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa was faced with beliefs that resonated with his own. He was particulary keen on the idea of Latinity, which he had heard about before in his family. A big part of studying law was history. The introduction of Hungarian as a study language in 1867 had become an even bigger a challenge for the young Romanians interested in finding their roots. So, Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa become a document editor and historian. His most important book, “Diplomas from 14th and 15th century Maramures” is a collection of documents about the Land of Maramures, the first of this kind about his native region, in Latin. And in 1902 the Romanian Academy recognized the special efforts made by the author in this regard and awarded him a prize.



    Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa stood for the common Romanians who had no national or civic rights. He stressed his mission also before the representative of the Hungarian Government who was demanding loyalty by forcing the Romanian communities to speak Hungarian. Here is Lucia Mihalyi of Apsa recalling that meeting:



    “They took the little church that my father had built. Because they demanded that Hungarian be used during the mass and also in the confessional school. And my father said: we have a 700-year-old Constitution. And if we use Hungarian at church and in school, then the peasants will no longer send their children to school. And a people that does not advance, will perish. He was told to go to Bucharest with his ideas, but my father said that those in Bucharest were Romanian and they did not need a lawyer. He said he would stay where he was to protect the peasants, as the peasants were really poor and oppressed by the Hungarian state.”



    Ioan Mihalyi of Apsa died in 1914, before the Big War ended. A tough war, that entailed lots of sacrifices, and which ended with the opening of a new world in a new country for the Romanians in Maramures.




  • Femininity and Childhood in Modern Times

    Femininity and Childhood in Modern Times

    Romanians
    gave up the Oriental style and fashion and quickly adopted Western fashions
    radically changing their dressing style and the interior decorations of their
    homes.




    Women
    quickly embraced the Western trends and proved to be the main promoters of
    these changes in the Romanian society. Furthermore, the change in mentalities
    allowed women to get more involved in social activities destined for children
    and not only. So, in the first half of the 19th century children
    benefitted from improved education and standard of living in comparison to the
    previous generations. Well-off families in the aforementioned principalities started
    hiring German, English or French tutors for their children, which replaced the
    previous Greek private teachers they used to have. Bourgeois families in these
    two regions inhabited by Romanians had their own approach in the education of
    their offspring. Here is now at the microphone Nicoleta Roman, researcher with
    the Nicolae Iorga Institute of History:

    There was the emerging bourgeoisie, made up mainly of traders trying
    to imitate the aristocrats in these regions. And in this case, these children’s
    childhood was somehow protected by the involvement of their parents who
    invested in their education in order to improve their status and the status of
    their families. And it was that investment that made the difference between the
    children coming from the rich families and aristocracy and the rest.





    The issue of childhood
    in the rural areas in the first half of the 19th century is still
    under the scrutiny of the historians. However, what is known for certain is
    that the struggle for survival in that area didn’t prove beneficial to the
    process of transformations of Wallachia and Moldavia in early 19th
    century. Changes in people’s outlook on childhood and the status of women were
    quite sluggish in the rural world and the young boyars who were the engine of these
    changes had their own outlook on education, mainly supervised by their mothers,
    who thus become the promoters of new ideas in this area. Here is again at the
    microphone Nicoleta Roman:






    We should not forget to mention the
    young generation of revolutionaries of 1848 or their associates who had made it
    to major positions in state structures. They had different approaches in terms
    of education and a series of state-funded social policies regarding education
    or social assistance started to emerge. The growing interest in children
    education shed a new light on childhood as compared to the previous years,
    making children more visible in society. There was also that feeling of
    national identity and the C.A. Rosetti – Mary Grant couple was a case in point.
    That was a cosmopolitan couple who loved their children very much and tried to
    instill this feeling of national identity in them, including through the names
    they had given to them. Their first daughter was named Liberty and we’ve learnt
    that the aforementioned feeling was also shared by their friends, the Golescu
    and Bratianu families. So, the elite changed and so did its approach to children
    education. The spirit of the 18th century had been replaced by one
    focusing on how those children could represent the nation better and how they
    could assume the values of a certain nation.




    Journalist, writer, political leader
    and revolutionary Constantin Alexandru Rosetti aka C.A.Rosetti in 1847 married Mary
    Grant, a Scotswoman who was working as a governess. The couple was to become an
    example not only for their cosmopolitan style but also for the fact they tried
    to fairly share the household tasks and chores. They had a joint contribution
    to their children’s education and worked together over their publications. Mary
    Grant rapidly adopted the ideals of modernizing the Romanian space at that
    time. And as Nicoleta Roman pointed out she wasn’t the only woman changing her
    status in those years.


    There was in early 19th century a tendency of
    professionalizing some aspects in a woman’s life. The woman could become a
    midwife, a teacher or a babysitter. These were paid activities and started
    being integrated in the state system. So women started taking off from the
    private field and finding their own way in life without giving up families or
    households. They started gaining public recognition. At the same time, women
    from the upper classes got involved in the process of founding charity
    associations and charity actions. Some of them got involved in the process of
    editing various publications. The 19th century saw a significant
    improvement in terms of women’s involvement in society than the previous one.     (bill)

  • Franz Liszt Touring the Romanian Principalities

    Franz Liszt Touring the Romanian Principalities

    In 1846, pianist and composer Franz Liszt, already a world celebrity at that point, started his last grand European tour in the southeast of the continent. He held recitals in many cities, among them Vienna, Sibiu, Bucharest, Iasi, Cernauti, Istanbul, and finally Odessa, wrapping up his tour in Czarist Russia.

    In December 1846, he landed in Bucharest, the capital of Wallachia, where he was hosted by the grand boyar Mihai Ghica. In January 1847 he held a recital in the palace of Prince Gheorghe Bibescu. In Bucharest, the cosmopolitan musician found a special kind of society, hospitable and curious, which was still navigating the dividing line between the Orient that had been the basis of local culture, and the West, whose ways the local elites were starting to adopt.

    The elites, meaning the old nobility and the nascent bourgeoisie, had started to modernize, and their children were already Western educated, and were starting to be seen as individuals, not simply miniature inheritors of their parents’ traditions.

    Nicoleta Roman, a historian specializing in the 19th century, spoke to us about the ways in which artistic tastes and education of children in the Romanian Principalities in the early 19th century:

    Nicoleta Roman: In the 18th century we see these kids in votive paintings wearing pretty much the same clothing as their parents, just at a smaller scale. Which is why votive paintings are a great source for studying the appearance of elite children. Then there is the way in which they were educated, mostly at home. In late 18th century, these were mostly of Greek extraction, due to the presence of the Phanariote rule, but, as we transition into the 19th century, the teachers are mostly French, and some were German, even English. These teachers bring in Western culture to Eastern Europe and the Romanian Principalities, and the parents seek to strike a balance between these influences. Then there is the bourgeoisie taking shape at the time, mainly traders, who are striving to imitate what they see in noble families. Which means they invest in their children, in their education, or veneer of education. This is what differentiates the offspring of noble and bourgeois families from peasant children.

    The change of the education paradigm also reflects in artistic tastes. Which is why such and excellent representative of Western music as Franz Liszt enjoyed such huge success in Bucharest and in Iasi, the capital of Moldavia. He went there in January 1847, staying in the home of treasury keeper Alecu Bals. There he held a recital, and for that he was brought from Paris an Erard piano. This type of professional instruments were not available in the Principalities at the time. Publications of the time, with articles written by young intellectuals that were about to take part in the 1848 revolution, fighting for the modernization of the country, featured many enthusiastic articles about Liszt.

    At the same time, the great artist took full advantage of his tour, learning about Romanian folk music and meeting local composers, such as the one who wrote the anthem for the union of the Principalities in 1859.

    Nicoleta Roman:

    I loved Liszt because he went all over Southeast Europe, and had the resilience to get through a very busy concert schedule. This was admirable for that time, because he was almost 40 years old. This series of concerts in Southeast Europe was the last of his grand tours, and I see him as the artist who best embodies this meeting between West and East. He was a true product of Western culture, but his origins helped understand Southeast Europe. He did not exclude the local element in his concerts, and we see him collaborating with composer Alexandru Flecthenmacher, and other personalities over here.

    As a great collector of Southeast European folklore, which he used in his compositions, Franz Liszt had the opportunity to listen to famous traditional composers and interpreters, such as Barbu Lautaru, whose last name is actually a nickname, meaning ‘traditional urban player’. In fact, Liszt, as he was unconcerned with making money, knew how to draw in both rich and poor audiences.

    Nicoleta Roman:

    We could say he had stage star behavior. He knew who he was, and what he needed to be successful. His style and his way of playing could pull at the heartstrings of every nobleman, and even the Sultan, because he also played in Constantinople. He could also touch the hearts of less wealthy people. That is the reason he was in such high demand, because by the time he came here, in 1846-1847, he knew how to put on a great show. He had resounding fame everywhere, and he could fill any room. He played for the elites, but he also held free concerts, for the less wealthy.





    When he left Iasi, he made a short stopover in the Danube port of Galati, then went on to go to Istanbul, ending the tour in Odessa.

  • Modern architecture and newspapers in inter-war Romania

    Modern architecture and newspapers in inter-war Romania


    The link between the most widely-read Romanian daily before World War One and in the inter-war years and the staple Greater Romania architectural style is provided by the Universul Palace, the headquarters of the newspapers office. The Universul daily was inaugurated on August 20, 1884. Its founder was the Italian Luigi Cazzavillan. Universul became the most widespread Romanian newspaper until its printing was discontinued by the communist regime in the early 1950s. In time, Universuls numerous supplements increased the papers number of copies sold, turning Universul into the core of a true journalistic empire. A former volunteer in Garibaldis army, Cazzavillan settled in Bucharest. He taught Italian, being also the representative of the Bianchi bicycle factory. These days, Cazzavillan has precisely been paid tribute to thanks to his essential contribution to the development of Romanian popular journalism through widely-accessible publications, which popularized, without, however, vulgarizing, cultural and scientific pieces of information. Unfortunately, Cazzavillan died an untimely death at the age of 52, in early 1904. As for Universul, around the outbreak of the first World War, it was no longer in print. Its editing was later resumed, under the management of different owners, of whom the most famous and longest-living was journalist Stelian Popescu. For the most part of the inter-war era, until 1943, Stelian Popescu was at the helm of Universul. Also, Stelian Popescu transferred, to the content of the newspaper, his own right-of-centre political leanings. Universul did not maintain its political neutrality, yet it still was the most widespread newspaper of his time. Also, Universul managed to survive for a little while during the communist regime, until 1953. And it is also during Stelian Popescus management that the inter-war headquarters of the editorial office date from. Were speaking about the Universul Palace. Erected following the project of the great architect Paul Smărăndescu, the building is tall and imposing. It is a mix of the neo-Romanian style, so very conspicuous in the countrys architecture after the Great Union of 1918, and the modernist style.



    Oana Marinache is an art historian. She will now be speaking about Paul Smarandescu, a prolific architect born on June 16, 1881. His roots are in one of Bucharests historical areas, which has remained almost unspoiled to this day.



    Oana Marinache:



    “He was born in the Mântuleasa neighborhood. The young man was born into a well-do-do family. On his mothers, but also on his fathers side, he hailed from a family of merchants from across the Danube, a province which at that time was part of the Ottoman Empire. Were speaking about the Solacolu family. So the young Paul Smărăndescu, together with his junior sisters, was born into a family which was part of the thriving bourgeoisie. In late 19th century he attended the Mantuleasa boys primary school, lying nearby. Then he furthered his education with the Matei Basarab high-school and, in late 19th century, he sat for the entrance exam with our school of architecture which had been founded already. So he went domestic for his junior student years. Later, enjoying the support of his family, he went to the Universal Exhibition in Paris in 1900, where he made contact with the pavilions and the elite of world architecture. And then a U-turn occurred in his career path, a complete change, that is. He would of course prepare to sit in for the architecture School entrance exam in France, where his trail was much faster. He earned his French diploma and returned to the country in 1906. And in 1907 he was already on the job, being employed in Bucharest. “



    Upon his return to the country, Paul Smărăndescu gradually became one of the promoters of the neo-Romanian style which he nonetheless improved significantly with modernist contributions.



    Oana Marinache:



    “His activity can be broken down into two directions or two professional paths. One, where he is on his own, he has his own office. Concurrently, however, he also held a public position, since he had a job with the public administration. In his early years he pursued the career of head architect with the Religions Affairs and Public Instruction Ministry, and for the most part of his career he would work with the Interior Ministrys technical service, and he retired from there around the Second World War. Towards the final part of his career, he started work for the Interior Ministry Palace, the former headquarters of the Romanian Communist Partys Central Committee and of the Romanian Senate, after December 1989. Being one year away from his retirement and also taking into account certain political changes – we are in the final years of Carol the 2nd s reign – the building as we can see it today is the outcome of the work of another architect, his colleague who actually took over from the Interior Ministry, Emil Nădejde. His versatility enabled him to approach the whole range of styles, from the French eclectic style to the neo-Romanian style, he was one of the noted promoters of that style, yet in the 1930s he approached and adapted to the commissions of his time. Which means he also had tenement buildings, or modernist buildings, buildings that were simpler, decoration-wise, but which at that time were in fashion. For instance, the modernist buildings on the Magheru Boulevard, which are multi-storey buildings.”



    Also a multi-storey building, a seven-storey building, actually, is the Universul Palace, inaugurated in 1930. Located nearby the University of Bucharest and the Victoria Boulevard, in the vicinity of the headquarters of other leading publications of that time, the Universul Palace was home to the editorial office. Yet apart from that, it was also home to the printing press, the managements offices and the accounting department. In 1948 it was nationalized, yet it retained its status of headquarters for editorial offices. Over 2015 and 2016, the building went through a thorough refurbishment process. However, the shape that was initially designed by Paul Smarandescu was, for its most part, preserved.


    (EN)