Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:21:15.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unholy Alliances? Language Exams, Loyalty, and Identification in Interwar Romania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2018

Gábor Egry
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article analyzes national loyalty and identification by examining the language exams administered to minority public officials in Romania in 1934 and 1935. The exams aimed at testing officials’ knowledge of the state language, but given the broader political context they were more than a survey of linguistic skills. Examinees were singled out as non-Romanian and subjected to an additional requirement not demanded from their ethnic Romanian colleagues, interpreting the use of the official language as a sign of loyalty. Drawing upon theories of loyalty as a historical concept, the paper analyzes how the particular situation of minority public officials was reflected in these texts and how they created a specific identification for themselves, composed of important elements of their minority ethnicity but also expressing their identification with the state and its modernizing goals as members of a unified, professional public body. The language exams signaled the emergence of a specific category of minority public servants who were part of both the minority group and the middle-class functionaries of the Romanian state. Nationalist public discourse on both sides—Romanian and minority—have denied and erased the history of these hybrid loyalties and identities, but the languages exams help us to recover them.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 76 , Issue 4 , Winter 2017 , pp. 959 - 982
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 2018 

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. The total number of Romania-related Hungarian petitions between the League of Nation’s founding and 1939 was forty-seven. Twenty-five arrived before 1934, nine in 1934, and five in 1935. Miklós, Zeidler, “A Nemzetek Szövetsége és a magyar kisebbségi petíciók,” in Nándor, Bárdi and Csilla, Fedinec, eds., Etnopolitika: A közösségi, magán- és nemzetközi érdekek viszonyrendszere Közép-Európában (Budapest, 2003) 59–84, esp. 79–80Google Scholar. See also Eiler, Ferenc, “International Minority Defense System: The League of Nations,” in Nándor, Bárdi, Csilla, Fedinec, and László, Szarka, eds., Minority Hungarian Communities in the Twentieth Century (Boulder, Co., 2011), 92–101 Google Scholar.

2. The League of Nations Archive, Geneva. Document C.337.1937.I. I’m grateful to Miklós Zeidler, who kindly shared the materials he collected with me.

3. Magyar Nemzeti Levéltár Országos Levéltára (MNLOL), Keleti Akció (Népies Irodalmi Társaság), P1077, vol. 9, 862–77.

4. See Török, Zsuzsanna Borbála, “Planning the National Minority: Strategies of the Journal Hitel in Romania, 1935–1944,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 7, no. 2 (2001): 57–74 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mikó, Imre, Huszonkét év: Az erdélyi magyarság politikai története 1918. december 1-től 1940. augusztus 30-ig (Budapest, 1941) 16–17, 170, 174Google Scholar; Bíró, Sándor, Kisebbségben és többségben: Románok és magyarok 1867–1940 (Csíkszereda, 2002), 300–5Google Scholar. Bíró’s book was based on material collected by Hungarian government agencies with the aim of propagating Hungary’s arguments concerning the Transylvanian question. See also Nagy, László, A kisebbségek alkotmányjogi helyzete Nagyromániában (Kolozsvár [Cluj-Napoca], 1944), 187–88Google Scholar.

5. Mócsy, István I., The Effects of World War I. The Uprooted: Hungarian Refugees and Their Impact on Hungary’s Domestic Politics, 1918–1921. East European Monographs no. 147, Social Science Monographs, Brooklyn College Studies on Society in Change, No. 31 (Boulder. Co., 1983), 13, 53–54 Google Scholar.

6. Brubaker, Rogers, “Nationalizing States, National Minorities and External National Homelands in the New Europe,” in Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (Cambridge, 1996), 55–76 Google Scholar.

7. Cole, Laurence and Unowsky, Daniel, eds., The Limits of Loyalty: Imperial Symbolism, Popular Allegiances, and State Patriotism in the Late Habsburg Empire (New York, 2007)Google Scholar; Klein-Pejšová, Rebekah, Mapping Jewish Loyalties in Interwar Slovakia (Bloomington, 2015)Google Scholar; Schulze-Wessel, Martin, ed., Loyalitäten in der Tschechoslowakischen Republik, 1918–1938: Politische, nationale und kulturelle Zugehörigkeit (Munich, 2004)Google Scholar; Haslinger, Peter and von Puttkamer, Joachim, “Staatsmacht, Minderheit, Loaylität—konzeptionelle Grundlagen am Beispiel Ostmittel—und Südosteuropa in der Zwischenkriesszeit,” in Haslinger, Peter and von Puttkamer, Joachim, eds., Staat, Loyalität und Minderheiten in Ostmittel – und Südosteuropa 1918–1941 (Munich, 2007), 1–16 Google Scholar.

8. Brubaker, Rogers and Cooper, Frederick, “Beyond ‘Identity,’” Theory and Society 29, No. 1 (February 2000): 1–47 Google Scholar; Stachel, Peter, “Identität. Genese, Inflation und Probleme eines für die zeitgenössischen Sozial – und Kulturwissenschaften zentralen Begriffs,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 87, no. 2 (2005), 395–425 Google Scholar. For an analysis of the ethnicization of concepts of nationality and citizenship, a process that implied the increasing identification of loyalty with ethnicity, see Benno, Gammerl, Untertanen, Staatsbürger und Andere: Der Umgang mit ethnischer Heterogenität im Britischen Weltreich und im Habsburgerreich 1867–1918 (Göttingen, 2010)Google Scholar.

9. See Laurence Cole and Daniel Unowsky, “Introduction: Imperial Loyalty and Popular Allegiances in the Late Habsburg Monarchy,” in Cole and Unowsky, The Limits of Loyalty, 1–9.

10. See Alon Rachamimov’s formulation of civic loyalty, “Collective Identifications and Austro-Hungarian Jews (1914–1918),” in Cole and Unowsky, The Limits of Loyalty, 180–82; Klein-Pejsová, Mapping Jewish Loyalty, 39.

11. Martin Schulze-Wessel, “‘Loyalität’ als geschichtlicher Grundbegriff und Forschungskonzept: Zur Einleitung,” in Schulze-Wessel, ed., Loyalitäten in der Tscheschoslowakischen Republik, 2–3; Haslinger and Puttkamer, “Staatsmacht, Minderheit, Loyalität,” 3.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Müller, Dietmar, Staatsbürger auf Widerruf: Juden und Muslime als Alteritätspartner im rumänischen und serbischen Nationscode: Ethnonationale Staatsbürgerschaftskonzepte 1878–1941 (Wiesbaden, 2005), 385–89Google Scholar.

15. Haslinger and Puttkamer, “Staatsmacht, Minderheit, Loyalität,” 13–16.

16. Brubaker and Cooper, “Beyond ‘Identity,’” 14–17.

17. Brubaker, Rogers, “Ethnicity without Groups,” European Journal of Sociology 43, no. 2 (August 2002): 163–89Google Scholar.

18. Brubaker and Cooper, “Beyond ‘Identity,’” 14–17.

19. Bíró, Magyarok és románok; Mikó, Huszonkét év; Bárdi, Fedinecz and Szarka, eds., Hungarian Minority Communities, 164–77, 194–201.

20. Sora, Andrei Florin, Servir l’état Roumain. Le corps préfectoral, 1866–1940 (Bucharest, 2011)Google Scholar; Müller, Dietmar and Sora, Andrei Florin, “Notarul comunal în România: Cadrul normativ al unei institutii moderne (1964–1940),” Arhivele Olteniei 25 (2011): 369–85Google Scholar.

21. Sora, Andrei Florin, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire’ en Roumanie. Idéologie de la Nation et pratiques d’État (1918–1940),” in Vainovski-Mihai, Irina, ed., New Europe College Ștefan Odobleja Program Yearbook 2009–2010 (Bucharest, 2011), 207–31Google Scholar; Sora, Andrei Florin, “Les fonctionnaires publics Roumains appartenant aux minorités ethniques dans la Grande Roumanie,” in Marton, Silvia, Oroveanu, Anca, and Țurcanu, Florin, eds., L’Etat en France et en Roumanie aux XIXe et XXe siècles (Bucharest, 2011), 167–95Google Scholar.

22. Mócsy, The Effects of World War I. The Uprooted, 67–82, 153–75. Between 1920 and 1926 almost a third of the MPs in Hungary’s parliament were of refugee background.

23. Ablonczy, Balázs, “Sérelem, jogfolytonosság, frusztráció. Alsó-Fehér vármegye menekült törvényhatósága Budapesten, 1919–1921,” in Ablonczy, Balázs, Nyombiztosítás: Letűnt magyarok: Kisebbség-és művelődéstörténeti tanulmányok (Pozsony, Slovakia, 2011), 159–75Google Scholar.

24. Nagy, A kisebbségek alkotmányjogi helyzete, 186–88. Bíró, Kisebbségben és többségben, 303–6; Jakabffy, Elemér and Páll, György, A bánsági magyarság húsz éve Romániában (Budapest, 1939), 60–68, 221Google Scholar.

25. Bíró, Kisebbségben és többségben, 304. This figure, as we will see, is unrealistically low.

26. Livezeanu, Irina, Cultural Politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, Nation Building and Ethnic Struggle 1918–1930 (Ithaca, 1995), 49–53 Google Scholar. Sora, Servir l’état Roumain.

27. Alexandru Vaida Voevod to Iuliu Maniu, Paris, May 5, 1919. Arhivele Naţionale Istorice Centrale, Bucharest (ANIC), Fond Vaida Voevod, dosar 59, f. 7–8. A literary portrayal of the phenomenon is found in János Kemény, Kutyakomédia (Kolozsvár [Cluj-Napoca], 1935).

28. For example in the county of Turda Arieş with an ethnically mixed population at the beginning of 1920. Only 2–3 out of sixty-eight village notaries remained, the others were expelled from their posts already at the end of 1918, irrespective of their nationality. Egry, Gábor, “Közvetlen demokrácia, nemzeti forradalom: Hatalomváltás, átmenet és a helyi nemzeti tanácsok Erdélyben, 1918–1919,” Múltunk 55, no. 3 (2010): 92–108 Google Scholar.

29. Arhivele Naţionale Secţia Judeţeană Timiş (ANSJ TM), fond 223, Prefectura Județului Severin (Prefecture of the Severin County), dosar 19/1919, f. 6–18.

30. Data on 1910 hereafter taken from A Magyar Szent Korona országainak 1910. évi népszámlálása 4. A népesség foglalkozása a főbb demográfiai adatokkal összevetve. Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények, volume 56 (Budapest, 1915), available online at http://konyvtar.ksh.hu/inc/kb_statisztika/Manda/MSK/MSK_056.pdf and https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/NEDA_1910_04/?pg=0&layout=s (both last accessed October 10, 2017).

31. ANSJ TM, fond 223, Prefectura Județului Severin, dosar 49/1923. For the Romanian middle-class in the county and its origins see Irina Marin, “The Formation and Allegiance of the Romanian Military Elite Originating from the Banat Military Border” (Ph.D. Diss., University College London, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, 2009).

32. See for example ANIC, Consiliul Dirigent (CD), Administrația Județeană şi Comunală (County and Communal Administration), dosar 79/1919, f. 104–116; dosar 65/1919, f. 87–89.

33. Arhivele Naționale Secția Județeană Brașov (ANSJ BV), fond 2, Prefectura Județului Brașov (Prefecture of the Braşov County), inventar 347, Serviciul Administrativ (Administrative Service), dosar 1/1923, f. 1–70. See also ANIC CD Administraţia Județeană și Comunală, dosar 72/1919, f. 12–20.

34. Livezeanu, Cultural Politics.

35. Sora, Servir ’état Roumain, 130–52; Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire,’” 210.

36. Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire,’” 210 ; Möckel, Andreas, Umkämpfte Volkskirche: Leben und Wirken des evangelisch-sächsischen Pfarrers Konrad Möckel (1892–1965) (Cologne, 2011), 36–38 Google Scholar.

37. Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire,’” 222.

38. For the specific Romanianization attempt in this region see Irina Livezeanu, Cultural Politics, 140–42, and Bottoni, Stefano, “New Projects, National Identities, Everyday Compromises: Szeklerland in Greater Romania (1918–1940),” Hungarian Historical Review 2, no. 3 (2013): 477–511 Google Scholar.

39. ANSJ TM, fond 22, Prefectura Județului Severin, dosar 34/1934, f. 140–42.

40. ANIC Ministerul de Interne (Ministry of Interior), inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 9–15.

41. ANSJ TM, fond 543, Prefectura Județului Timiș-Torontal (Prefecture of Timiș-Torontal County), dosar 34/1935, f. 3.

42. Arhivele Naționale Secția Județeană Mureș (ANSJ MS), Prefectura Târnava Mare, inventar 415, dosar 3/1938, f. 17–18; ANIC, Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 27/1937, f. 10–18 , f. 53–54; dosar 175/1935, f. 88; dosar 176/1935, f. 82–83.

43. Sora, “Les fonctionnaires publics Roumains,” 175. This conclusion is indirectly corroborated by the statistics of refugees from southern Transylvania after the Second Vienna Award. Only around half a million Hungarians lived in this region according to the 1930 census. Still, the Central Office of Statistics registered 1,572 public servant refugees between 1940 and early 1944, which is alone more than the staggeringly low figure of Bíró, mentioned above, for the entire territory. This group was complemented with 3,954 refugees who left behind public transportation services in Romania. If the ratio of these refugees to the number of minority inhabitants in southern Transylvania was indicative of the relation of these two groups to the whole minority population of Greater Romania (a hypothesis otherwise never tested) than the number of minority public employees of all categories could have been as high as 35,000, see “A romániai menekültek főbb adatai az 1944. februári összeírás alapján,” Statisztikai Szemle, 25, no. 9–12 (1944): 394–411, Table 6: 406, Table 7: 408Google Scholar.

44. A similar pattern is observable within interwar Czechoslovak state police. Ronsin, Samuel, “Police, Republic and Nation: The Czechoslovak State Police and the Building of a Multinational Democracy, 1918–1925,” in Blaney, Gerald, ed., Policing Interwar Europe: Continuity, Change and Crisis, 1918–40 (Basingstoke, 2007), 136–58Google Scholar.

45. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 21/1937 10–18., dosar 27/1937, f. 15–16.; ANSJ TM, fond 223; Prefectura Județului Severin, dosar 34/1934, f. 140–46., f. 53–54; ANSJ TM fond 69. Prefectura Județului Timiș-Torontal inventar 171, dosar 10/1938. f. 35–45.

46. Gidó, Attila, School Market and the Educational Institutions in Transylvania, Partium and Banat between 1919 and 1948. Working Papers in Romanian Minority Studies 39 (Cluj-Napoca, 2011.) 33–44 Google Scholar. See also Irina Livezeanu, Cultural Politics, 79.

47. ANSJ TM, fond 223. Prefectura Județului Severin, dosar 34/1934, f. 140–46.

48. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 27/1937, f. 10–18.

49. ANSJ TM, fond 543, Prefectura Județului Timiș-Torontal, dosar 34/1935, f. 3.

50. The prefect was the representative of the government and the chief of the county administration. He was appointed by the government to administer government affairs in his jurisdiction. The position was more political than administrative and prefects were very often politicians, Sora, Servir l’etait Roumain.

51. ANSJ BV, fond 2, Prefectura Judeţului Braşov, Serviciul Administrativ, inventar 374, dosar 1/1934.

52. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935.

53. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 55–81: dosar 176/1935, f. 71.

54. ANSJ TM, fond 69, Prefectura Judeţului Timiş-Torontal, dosar 34/1935, ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 126. For a few titles see Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire,’” 216.

55. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 100.

56. Ibid., f. 129.

57. Ibid., f. 200–56.

58. These elements include: 1. Mentioning the county; 2. Mentioning the city, its characterization; 3. Number of inhabitants, their characterization; 4. Location and natural environment; 5. Ethnic distribution of the population; 6. Typical or fine buildings; 7. Schools; 8. Pupils; 9. Churches; 10. Tourist attractions; 11. Traffic and transport; 12. Economy, occupation of the population; 13. Public spaces; 14. City leadership; 15. History; 16. Public institutions. All of these were mentioned at least once.

59. The texts were preserved with the corrections. Examiners noted every deviation from their own national view, for example when someone mentioned the Saxon majority, but no one failed because of such statements.

60. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 226. In this case the author was partly educated in Munich.

61. Ibid., f. 215, 217.

62. Ibid. f. 255.

63. Ibid., f. 225. The author was customs official with six grades of primary education.

64. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 7–15, 26, 47. In Sălaj successful candidates needed a grade of 5.5.

65. Permanent bodies for disciplinary procedures against public servants.

66. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 3.

67. Livezeanu, Cultural Politics, 245–96; Heinen, Armin, Die Legion “Erzengel Michael” in Rumänien-Soziale Bewegung und politische Organisation (Munich, 1986), 192–235 Google Scholar.

68. Müller, Staatsbürger auf Widerruf, 385–89; Maner, Hans-Christian, Parlamentarismus im Rumänien (1930–1940): Demokratie im autoritären Umfeld (Munich, 1997), 200–6Google Scholar.

69. Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire,’” 219.

70. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 176/1935, f. 33. The failure rate was not quite high in the county, with 4 out of 13 at the exam of village notaries and communal employees failing. Ibid., f. 70–73.

71. Ibid., f. 82.

72. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 137–38.

73. Ibid., f. 154–59.

74. Ibid., f. 154; ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 176/1935, f. 117–21. The administrators of Arad managed the issue similarly, delaying compliance with the ministerial order as long as the disciplinary commission handed out its verdicts, and afterwards relying on the legal opinion of the city’s counsel that refused to reopen these cases.

75. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 150; dosar 176/1935, f. 75, 132–34.

76. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 195; dosar 176/1935, f. 47.

77. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 176/1935, f. 110.

78. Ibid., f. 14.

79. Ibid., f. 6–7, 27, 111, 130, 149.

80. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 134. The county Commission of Revision was a forum of appeal against administrative acts and local decrees. The National Commission of Revision was the second level of appeal for the whole country.

81. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 176/1935, f. 82, 110.

82. ANSJ TM, fond 69, Prefectura Județului Timiș-Torontal, inventar 171, dosar 32/1935, f. 140–59.

83. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 26.

84. Ibid., f. 37, f. 86.

85. Ibid., f. 84–87.

86. Ibid., f. 96.

87. Ibid., f. 126–27.

88. Ibid., f. 142. Gonda worked at the forestry department and Lakatos in the technical services section of the city hall already in 1925. They probably gained the necessary linguistic competence to stand the exam in this customized format, while their long service exemplifies the longer relationship necessary in order to develop loyalty. Calendarul Administrativ pe 1925- pentru uzul autorităţilor administrative comunale si judetene. Anul I (Cluj, 1925), 325–26Google Scholar.

89. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 175/1935, f. 126–27.

90. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, inventar 754, dosar 176/1935, f. 54.

91. Ibid. f. 35–36. See also Sora, “Étre fonctionnaire ‘minoritaire’,” 216.

92. ANSJ TM, fond 69; Prefectura Timiş-Torontal (Prefecture of Timiş-Torontal County), inventar 171, dosar 35/1935, f. 16–26.

93. ANSJ TM, fond 69; Prefectura Timiş-Torontal (Prefecture of Timiş-Torontal County), inventar 171, dosar 36/1935, f. 75–78.

94. In the whole county 28% of those reexamined failed. ANSJ TM, fond 69; Prefectura Timiş-Torontal (Prefecture of Timiş-Torontal County), inventar 171, dosar 34/1935, f. 60. Most of the texts are accessible among the documents and they usually confirm the impression of weak Romanian skills.

95. ANSJ TM, fond 69, Prefectura Timiş-Torontal, inventar 171, dosar 35/1935, f. 16–26, f. 46.

96. ANIC Ministerul de Interne, Inventar 754, dosar 27/1937, f. 10–18.

97. ANSJ TM, fond 69; Prefectura Timiş-Torontal (Prefecture of Timiş-Torontal County), inventar 171, dosar 176/1935, f. 144.

98. The League of Nations Archive, Geneva. Document C.337.1937.I.

99. ANSJ TM, fond 69, Prefectura Timiş-Torontal, inventar 171, dosar 34/1935, f. 90–92; dosar 36/1935, f. 6–15.

100. See Livezeanu, Cultural Politics, esp. 129–87; Kührer-Wielach, Florian, Siebenbürgen ohne Siebenbürger?: Zentralstaatliche Integration und politischer Regionalismus nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg (Munich, 2014)Google Scholar.

101. ANSJ TM, fond 69, Prefectura Judetului Timiş-Torontal, inventar 171, dosar 35/1935, f. 104–201.

102. ANSJ BV, fond 2, Prefectura Judeţului Braşov, Serviciul Administrativ, inventar 347, dosar 1/1934.

103. Zahra, Tara, “Imagined Noncommunities. National Indifference as a Category of Analysis,” Slavic Review 69, no.1 (Spring 2010): 93–119 Google Scholar. See also Judson, Pieter M., The Guardians of the Nation: Activists on the Language Frontiers of Imperial Austria (Cambridge, Mass., 2006)Google Scholar; Zahra, Tara, Kidnapped Souls: National Indifference and the Battle for Children in the Bohemian Lands, 1900–1948 (Ithaca, 2008)Google Scholar and the thematic issue of the Austrian History Yearbook (2012).

104. Egry, Gábor, “A megértés határán. Nemzetiségek és mindennapok a két világháború közti Háromszéken,” Limes 20, no. 2 (2012): 29–50 Google Scholar.