Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:11:40.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Debunking a Myth: The Magyar-Romanian National Struggle of 1848–1849

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2009

Radu R. Florescu
Radu R. Florescu
Affiliation:
Boston College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I well remember as a child in Bucharest being taught by a reputable high school teacher that to speak kindly of Romanian-Magyar sympathizers was tantamount to asking for a failing grade. From elementary school on I can recall only the most disparaging remarks by my teachers about my Hungarian neighbors, and I challenge my friend Istvan Deak to say that sympathizers of the Romanians were ever more kindly treated in the lyceums of Budapest or Debrecen. Fortunately, we are sufficiently sophisticated today to realize that the writing of history is a matter of dates. I am, nevertheless, bewildered by the thought that the same Romanian schoolboy studying the revolutions of 1848 in classrooms of 1940, 1952, and 1976 has been and is being taught that the villains of yesterday are the heroes of today.

Type
National Interests and Cosmopolitan Goals in the Hungarian Revolution of 1848–1849
Information
Austrian History Yearbook , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 1976 , pp. 82 - 89
Copyright
Copyright © Center for Austrian Studies, University of Minnesota 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Compare, for instance, the treatment in Roller's, Mihail textbook, Istoria Republicii Populare Romine. Manual pentrǎ invǎlǎmintul mediu [History of the People's Republic. Manual for Public Schools] (Bucharest: State Printing Press, 1952)Google Scholar, with that in Amlaş, Dumitru, Buzǎu, G. Georgescu, and Petric's, Aron Istoria Romîniei. Manual pentru clasa XI [History of Romania. Eleventh Grade Manual] (Bucharest: State Printing Press, 1960)Google Scholar.

2 The complexity and confusion of the revolution is highlighted by Constantin Daicoviciu and Miron Constantinescu in their Brève histoire de la Transylvanie (Bucharest: Academy of the Romanian Socialist Republic, 1965), pp. 233–234 and 246Google Scholar.

3 The press was free “toutefois de fournir de très fortes cautions: 10,000 florins pour les journaux et 5,000 pour les périodiques. Ne pouvant faire face à ces lourdes allégations, le journal de Táncsics fut supprimé.” Ibid., p. 195.

4 Fischer-Galati, Stephen, “Romanian Nationalism,” in Sugar, Peter and Lederer, lvo, Nationalism in Eastern Europe (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press, 1969), pp. 373–395Google Scholar.

5 Daicoviciu and Constantinescu, Bréve histoire de la Transylvanie, p. 187.

6 Florescu, Radu, “The Uniate Church, Catalyst of Romanian National Consciousness,” Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. XLV, No. 105 (July, 1967), pp. 324–342Google Scholar.

7 On Dimitrie Brǎtianu's diplomatic mission to Pest and Vienna, see Bodea, Cornelia, Lupta Românilor pentru Unitatea Nationalǎ 1834–1849 (Bucharest: Academy of the Romanian Socialist Republic, 1967), pp. 148–149, 156–157, 162, and 328Google Scholar. An edition in the English language entitled The Romanians' Struggle Jor Unification—1834–1849 was published in Bucharest in 1970 by the Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania.

8 Mircea Malita states that 1848 marks “the inception of modern Romanian diplomacy.” See his Romanian Diplomacy. A Historical Survey (Bucharest: Meridiane Publishing House, 1970), p. 63Google Scholar. If this was actually the case, it was a half-hearted beginning.

9 See Istoria Romîniei [History of Romania] (5 vols., Bucharest: Academy of the Romanian People's Republic, 1964), Vol. IV, p. 34Google Scholar.

10 Daicoviciu and Constantinescu, Brève histoire de la Transylvanie, pp. 246–250

11 Ibid., p. 220.

12 Fotino, Gheorghe, Din Vemea, renaşerii naţionale. Boerii Goleşti (4 vols., Bucharest: National Publishing House, 1939), Vol. I, p. 83Google Scholar.

13 Bodea, Cornelia, “Nicolae Bǎlcescu, Revolutionary and Militant Diplomat,” Revue Roumaine des éludes Internationales, Vol. III (1969), No. 81, pp. 97–116Google Scholar.

14 For Gheorghe Magheru's role, see Apostol, Stan and Vlǎdu), Constantin, Gheorghe Magheru (Bucharest: Scientific Publishing House, 1969), p. 157Google Scholar.

15 “Depressed and ill, his mind falters. He [lancu] wanders around playing dances on a flute … in the Apuseni Mountains.” Giurescu, Constantin C., Istoria Românilor [History of the Romanians] (Bucharest: Royal Foundation for Literature and Art, 1939), p. 356Google Scholar.

16 For recent trends in Romanian historiography stressing Magyar-Romaniancollaboration, see DanCǎnisteanu, C. B., Florescu, Marin, and Niculae, Vasile, Revoluţia Românǎ din 1848 [The Romanian Revolution of 1848] (Bucharest: Political Publishing House, 1969), p. 295Google Scholar.