THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORICAL MYTHS FOR THE ETHNIC CONSCIOUSNESS OF ROMANIANS AND ETHNIC HUNGARIANS IN TRANSYLVANIA

Greet Van de Vyver

Greet Van de Vyver is Aspirant of the National Foundation for Scientific Research of Belgium and a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium.

Introduction

Since the political and economic transformations in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, this area has seen a surge of ethnic sentiments and movements. Several states are wracked by ethnic dissension. Consequently, it is a matter of some urgency to seek a broader understanding of the roots of ethnic conflicts and nationalist movements that threaten world peace. In this article I can touch only on some key issues in this vast field.

My perspective on ethnic consciousness is mainly based on examples drawn from my anthropological fieldwork in some multi-ethnic Transylvanian villages in Romania. More specifically, I will concentrate on some of the underlying conditions of the present ethnic tensions that exist between the Romanian majority and the ethnic Hungarian minority.:

The Population of Romania and Transylvania

The largest population of ethnic Hungarians outside Hungary lives in Romania. According to the most recent census of January 1992 there are 1,620,199 ethnic Hungarians, making up 7.1 percent of the Romanian population of 22,760,449. 2 So, according to the 1992 census, ethnic Hungarians make up the largest minority in Romania) The majority of ethnic Hungarians in Romania live in Transylvania, a region in the western third of the country that borders Hungary in the

Dialectical Anthropology 21: 381-398, 1996. �9 1996 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

382

west, the former Yugoslavia (Vojvodina) to the southwest and the Ukraine to the north. The region has a population of approximately seven million, three fifths of whom are ethnic Romanians. The remainder are primarily Hungarian, but numerous other ethnic groups are represented, including Roma, Germans, Ukrainians and Serbs.

There are two counties in Transylvania, namely Covasna and Harghita, where Hungarian-speaking people, the so-called Szeklers, make up a large majority of the population. I did anthropological fieldwork in two ethnically mixed villages in the county of Cluj, where one-fifth of the inhabitants are ethnic Hungarians. The villages where I stayed for nine months are Dumbrava and M~trfftstireni, which, respectively, are at a distance of 33 km and 45 km from the Transylvanian capital Cluj-Napoca, about 140 km from the Hungarian border.

Half the inhabitants of Dumbrava are ethnic Hungarians, 30 percent are ethnic Romanians and one-fifth are Gypsies. In MLr~stireni, however, it is just the opposite: here a 66 percent majority is Romanian, while ethnic Hungarians make up just over a quarter and the Gypsies are a minority, with only 6 percent. Ethnicity and religion coincide among the Romanian and Hungarian inhabitants of Dumbrava and M~nhstireni. This means that all Romanians have the orthodox Romanian faith, whereas the ethnic Hungarians are Calvinist. 4 The majority of the Gypsies are orthodox, some are Calvinist but, on the whole, Gypsies are rarely regular churchgoers.

Ethnic Hungarians in Romania

The fact that Hungarians form such a large minority in Transylvania can be explained by the history of the region. Historically, Transylvania was part of the Hungarian empire from the eleventh century to well into the sixteenth century. At that time there were already both Hungarian and Romanian-speaking people in that region. In 1526, the Turks defeated the Hungarian rulers and Transylvania became a semi-autonomous principality, ruled by the Hungarian princes but controlled by the Ottomans. At the end of the seventeenth century the Austrian Habsburgs expelled the Turks and took possession

383

of the region. From then on, Transylvania, together with Hungary, formed the eastern part of the vast Habsburg empire. But the continual resistance of the Hungarian nobility and landowners against the Habsburg dominance resulted in a compromise in 1867: the dual Austrian-Hungarian monarchy was installed and, as a result, Hungarian noblemen regained control over their former lands. But the end of the first World War also meant the end of the multi-nation Austrian-Hungarian empire. On June 4, 1920, Transylvania was attached to the then country of Romania by the Treaty of Trianon, much to the delight of the Transylvanian Romanian majority. Overnight, the ethnic Hungarians living in Transylvania were degraded from a dominating group to an ethnic minority. Centuries of Hungarian influence and control ended in 1920 with the Treaty of Trianon.

The northern part of the region shifted again to Hungarian control for a short time, from 1940 to 1945, before its status as Romanian territory was confirmed by the peace treaties following World War II. So, during the twentieth century, ethnic Romanians and ethnic Hungarians of Transylvania suffered assimilationist policies, as the region shifted back and forth between the control of the Hungarian and the Romanian states. This history affects all inter-ethnic relations in Romania. Given this historical context, trust and good-faith between the two groups are very difficult:

Although tensions between Romanians and Hungarians had grown during the two decades preceding the revolution, due to Ceausescu's manipulation of ethnic hostilities, all these tensions were temporarily forgotten during the revolution itself. For a brief moment in December 1989, ethnic Hungarians and Romanians were united in their opposition to the severe repression of the Ceausescu regime. According to Helsinki Watch, there have been significant improvements in many areas of concern to the Hungarian minority in Romania since the fall of the Ceausescu regime in 1989, but tensions remain high, resulting in an increasing sense of insecurity among the population. 6

384

Ethnic Groups

Ethnic Hungarians, as well as the Romanians living in Transylvania, are ethnic groups. Despite numerous efforts of social scientists and historians, there is still no overall model which is a valid reference for the social phenomenon of an "ethnic group." Here, I will not deal in detail with the development of theory about ethnicity. I will simply start from a definition by Anthony D. Smith. According to Anthony Smith, 7 an ethnic community is:

A named human group claiming a homeland and sharing myths of common ancestry, historical memories and a distinct culture.

He adds that we would normally expect an ethnic community, or segments thereof, to express sentiments of solidarity, even if only the urban classes share in the ethnic culture. 8

Ethnic Hungarians

On the basis of my fieldwork, I can state that the ethnic Hungarians of Dumbrava and Mfin,~stireni have not lost their ethnic identity in the interbellum and in the communist era. Both villages have specific ethnic Hungarians communities which are aware of their ethnicity in a positive way. Besides, the cohesion among the ethnic Hungarians of Dumbrava and M~a,~stireni, and the region of which these villages are a part, is very strong. The ethnic Hungarians have a strong sense of ethnic identity and they express their ethnic difference both in material and symbolic cultural features: a language and a religion of their own, Hungarian songs, dances, music, traditional costume, symbols (emblems, works of art, celebrated poets, historical heroes), shared memories and collective myths. The ethnic Hungarians of this region, in other words, are a self-conscious minority who certainly do not want to be absorbed by the Romanian majority. On the national and the international level, the ethnic Hungarians are generally seen as an oppressed group, requiring international protection.

Romanians

385

It is more surprising to see that Romanians, too, consider themselves as an ethnic group which, just like the other ethnic groups in the country, fights for fundamental rights and for maintaining its ethnic and cultural identity. That is also the view held by Romanians living in the villages of Dumbrava and M,mhstireni. The fact that they see themselves as members of one specific ethnic community among the other ethnic groups, reveals an acute sense of national insecurity, which is very similar to the sense of insecurity of the Transylvanian Romanians before 1918 (at that time under Hungarian rule). 9 The Romanian, or the national consciousness among the Romanian majority, appears to be quite strong. Just like the ethnic Hungarians, the Romanians of Transylvania use a variety of culture-related elements to make clear their Romanian identity and their group- awareness for their own members and for the others.

Historical Myths of Romanians and Ethnic Hungarians

Whenever Romanians and ethnic Hungarians spoke about their own ethnic community, similar themes recurred. The villagers mentioned elements which, on closer examinations, appeared to be based on a number of historic theories on the origin of the Romanian and the Hungarian people. Some views on history are part of the collective consciousness of the Romanian community, others are part of the collective consciousness of the ethnic Hungarians. Because these shared views of history are not always historically accurate or have not yet been proved but are, in spite of that, extremely important to the ethnic groups concerned, we can consider them as myths.

Modem myths construct identity and help to define connection to a place in a chaotic world and history. Historical myths are tales about the origin and the development of a nation, often drawing upon unhistoric and transs-historic elements, but which nevertheless remain convincing. They create a collective identity and strenghten solidarity. Shared historical myths play an important part in the rise of ethnic or national feeling, as well as in its survival and in its revival. This is

386

obvious in Transylvania: certain historical myths contributed, last century, to the rise of Romanian national consciousness and, even today, they are still the source of nationalist feelings for many Romanian citizens. In earlier times, Hungarian historical myths endowed Hungarian noblemen with a sense of superiority and they proved to be a strong argument in their struggle for political demands during the Habsburg dominance. Even today, they play an important part in the ethnic Hungarians' awareness of identity, as well as in their survival and revival as an ethnic group.

I will deal here in detail with specific historical myths and will look at the way in which they survive amongst villagers, and how they are transmitted.

Hungarian historical myths

a) The myth concerning the right of primogeniture in the Hungarians' claim to Transylvania

A first very widespread Hungarian myth concerns Hungarians and the region of Transylvania. I call this myth "the myth about the Hungarian right of primogeniture." It expresses the Hungarians' view about the history of their people and the conquest of Transylvalaia.

According to most Hungarian historians, Hungarian .tribes, having crossed the Danube and the Carpathian mountains at the end of the ninth century (895) in order to escape attacks, entered Transylvania for the first time. In the Hungarians' opinion, at the time of the Hungarian conquest, Transylvania was an uninhabited region, or, at most, thinly populated with Slavonic tribes. From here they went further westward and made war in nothern Italy. On their way back to Transylvania in 900, they took Pannonia (the present Hungarian plain) from the Slavonic tribes. ~o

According to the Hungarians, Romanians did not come to settle in Transylvania before the thirteenth century. Hungarian historians maintain that Transylvanian Romanians are mentioned for the first time in a historic document in 1222. They are believed to have come from the Balkan peninsula and to have been granted permission by

387

Hungarian rulers to settle in their region. 11 So, the Hungarians had been living in Transylvania two centuries before the Romanians arrived.

b) Transylvania as the birthplace of Hungarian culture and civilization

The second Hungarian myth is closely related to the first. It says that Transylvania has safeguarded the historic continuity of Hungarian culture and of the Hungarian state. In the course of history, the kingdom of Hungary was invaded more than once by other people, such as the Turks and the Habsburgs. To a large extent, the Hungarian kingdom consisted of plains and, as a result, it was easy to conquer. However, this was not true of the mountainous regions of their empire, like Transylvania. In the Hungarian collective consciousness only those Hungarians who lived in the Transylvanian mountains managed to maintain the authentic Hungarian culture at the time of the foreign invaders. This region was the refuge to which Hungarian culture retreated and the center of its development. According to the Hungarian view, Transylvania guaranteed the survival of the Hungarian people, their state and their culture! In other words, Transylvania is to them the home of Hungarian civilization.12

In p(evious centuries, these two myths played an important part when the Hungarians tried to obtain certain political rights during the rule of the Habsburgs. By pointing out that the Hungarians had been living in Transylvania for centuries and that they, in fact, were the original inhabitants, the Hungarians tried to persuade the Habsburgs that this region was theirs by right and that they could legitimately claim autonomous rule. This demand was an important aim of the 1848 Hungarian revolution, but it was only in 1867 that the Habsburgs partially agreed to that demand, when the Habsburg empire was changed into the dual Austrian-Habsburg monarchy.

To the present day, we lack proof for the historical accuracy of this version of Transylvanian history. But this does not prevent this view from being an integral part in the identity of Transylvanian Hungarians.

388

Romanian historical myths

In their collective consciousness, Romanians also draw on analagous historical myths about their ancestors and their homeland which make them feel united and which lend them dignity. ~3

a) The myth about the Romanians" ancestors

The first myth, the historical myth about the Romanians' ancestors, is as follows: about 2000 years ago, a people that were well organized, the so-called Dacians, lived in Transylvania. They were conquered by the Romans in the second century A.D. and their region became a province of the Roman empire. According to most Romanian historians, the Dacian and Roman people and their cultures blended and this is the origin of the Romanian people, the Romanian language and culture. Consequently, the oldest inhabitants of Transylvania were not the Hungarians but the Romanians. Romanian humanists found conclusive evidence that they were real descendants of the Daco- Romans in the Romanian language, based on Latin.

But it did not take long before the Hungarians hit back, when Hungarian historians pointed out the problem of continuity to the Romanians, as there was no proof of a Romanian presence in Transylvania during the first millenium. This explains why the Romanians came up with a second historical myth: the myth of Romanian continuity.

b) The myth of Romanian continuity

The theory of Romanian continuity states that Romanians, the product of Roman influence in Dacia, withdrew to the Transylvanian mountains after the Romans had pulled out and that their Latin language and culture were preserved in that region. They are believed to have lived there uninterruptedly. In their view, it was much later that the Hungarians conquered the Transylvanian plateau, to settle next to the original Romanian inhabitants.

The myth about the Romanian ancestors and the theory of continuity played an important role in the rise of Romanian nationalism in the

389

19th century and in the Transylvanian Romanians' struggle to unite Transylvania and Romania. However, those myths were drummed into Romanians, especially during the communist regime, so as to give them a sense of identity and pride. During Ceausescu's rule, they became dogma, as it were. Ceausescu saw himself as the direct descendant of the Dacian king Burebista. The communists succeeded in making the Romanian people swallow the historical myths about their people, its typical preconceived values and traditions. The belief that the Romanians descend from the mixing of the old Dacian people with the Romans makes up the core of Romanian collective consciousness.

c) Transylvania as the birthplace of Romanian civilization

The third historical myth of the Romanians is closely connected with the previous one. In Romanian consciousness, Transylvania is the birthplace of the Romanian people and its civilization because, in their view, Transylvania has always been a safe haven for their people and its culture. Despite numerous invasions and conquerors--Avars, Scyths, Huns, Turks and others--Romanian identity was well protected by the Transylvanian mountains.

So, just like the Hungarians, Romanians attribute a mythical significance to Transylvania, for to them it is the region that made it possible for their people to survive during the most crucial period in its history. This mythical perception of Transylvania, which may have little to do with reality, together with the other two myths, plays a key role in the national consciousness of the Romanian people. 14

The Romanians' and the ethnic Hungarians' views on the history of Transylvania are directly opposed. Both view Transylvania as the cradle of their civilization. Moreover, for many the question of the original inhabitants of Transylvania is inextricably linked with the "historical rights" to that region. 15

Although it is mainly the Hungarian and the Romanian historians and academics who are engaged in the discussion about Transylvania, 16 the debate has spread to the remote, small Transylvanian villages. During my fieldwork in Dumbrava and Mhnhstireni, I noticed that various historical myths are very much alive among the people. Romanian

390

villagers are convinced of the truth of the Romanian version while, the Hungarians defend the Hungarian version tooth and nail. I will give a few examples to illustrate this and I will look at how these myths are passed on among the villagers.

The Debate in the Village

Quite a few villagers make no secret about their view on history: Hungarians told me confidentially that not the Romanians but the Hungarians are the true inhabitants of Transylvania, because they have lived there much longer than the Romanians, and because Transylvania has always been part of the Hungarian empire. Some Romanian villagers, however, tried to convince me that they descended from the Daco-Romans and that, as such, they were a Latin people; that it was not the Hungarians, but they, who were the original inhabitants of Transylvania. They blame the Hungarians for deliberately distorting history, in order to strengthen their claim to an autonomous Hungarian region in Transylvania, or because they hope Transylvania will sooner or later return to Hungary.

On the whole, however, villagers are less explicit. There are other indications that they strongly believe in these myths, such as the way they present the history of their region and their village:

According to the ethnic Hungarians of Dumbrava and Mhnhstireni, their villages are situated in a particular historic-ethnographical region, namely Kalotaszeg. In their opinion, this name goes back to the Hungarian tribe of Kalota, who conquered this region some 1000 years ago. According to the ethnic Hungarians, the Kalotaszeg-region is a separate "Hungarian" region, where the Hungarian people have preserved their own traditions and customs. This view is confirmed by a number of books, illustrated with photos, which deal with the specific cultural heritage of the Hungarian Kalotaszeg people. A number of Hungarian families of Dumbrava and M~ufftstireni own such books. Although in the Kalotaszeg-region there are homogeneous Hungarian villages, ethnically mixed villages as well as homogeneous Romanian villages, these books show only pictures of villages where Hungarians live.17 The villages where Romanians live do not figure

391

in them. This helps to keep the Hungarian character of Transylvania in general, and of the Kalotaszeg-region in particular, very much alive in the consciousness of Hungarian villagers.

Romanians, however, are of the opinion that the villages of Dumbrava and Mfilfistireni are part of the region of Huedin. The term Kalotaszeg, to them, is little more than a meaningless anachronism.

Besides, every ethnic group has its own view of the history of its own village. A number of ethnic Hungarians of Dumbrava are convinced that, in earlier times, everyone in the village was Hungarian. They maintain that the Romanians lived in the neighboring mountain villages for centuries, and that they came to live in the village of Dumbrava only in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, in order to work on the land of the Hungarian landowners. That is why the Hungarians see themselves as b(,stinasi (these are native or indigenous people), while they consider the Romanians from the village as venituri (or "those who came"). The fact that the Hungarian reformed church of the village is much older than the Romanian orthodox church strengthens their conviction.

In Mhnfistireni, there are two different monographs about the village, one Hungarian and one Romanian. In the Hungarian monograph, written by a former calvinist clergyman of the village, it says that the first families to settle in the village were all Hungarian. 18 Moreover, to many ethnic Hungarians of the village, the old Hungarian church, dating from the thirteenth century, is clear proof that it was the Hungarians, and not the Romanians, who lived there first.

The Romanian monograph is a thesis about the folklore of the village, written in 1961 by a Romanian philologist of the village. The author argues that, about 1000 years ago, there were Romanians in Mfinfistireni but that these people withdrew into the mountains at the time of the Hungarian conquests. In the course of time, they are said to have left their retreat to settle again in their old village, next to the Hungarians. 19

The Romanians' conviction that they are of Daco-Roman descent is expressed in the Romanian national hyrlm Desteaptd-te, Romdme. The second stanza goes as follows:

392

Now or never we demonstrate to the world that in our hands "Roman" blood is coursing and that in our hearts we proudly cherish one conqueror's name, the name of "Trajan.'2~

Similarly, in many other songs, and even in jokes, elements of Romanian historical myths can be found. Also a number of everyday things remind people of their Daco-Roman ancestors: brand names like the Romanian car Dacia, names of institutions like the Dacia Felix Bank, names of hotels, towns and streetnames like hotel Hercules in Bhile Herculane and The hotel of the Emperor of the Romans in Sibiu.

Finally, both groups have a term of abuse for the other group, and that, to my mind, hints at the primogenitary right to Transylvania. Romanians occasionally call ethnic Hungarians bozgori, which the latter fred a gross insult. The term bozgor means as much as "you who came" and, thus, hints at the Romanian theory of continuity, which states that the Hungarian tribes arrived in Transylvania long after the Romanian people, who had been living there for hundreds of years.

The ethnic Hungarians' term of abuse for the Romanians is olahi. Some say this term is derived from the Romanian word oaie, which means sheep, and an olah is said to mean a herdsman. But more likely is that the term olah is derived from Vlach or Wallach, which denotes the inhabitants of the southern province Wallachia. Thus, by calling Transylvanian Romanians olahi in the latter meaning, Hungarians show they look upon them as a people coming from the south, from Wallachia and, consequently, they are not the indigenous population of Transylvania.

The Passing down of Historical Myths

Hungarian historical myths are passed down mainly in the family living room. Hungarian elderly people who still remember the time when Transylvania was part of Hungary and those Hungarians who have been through 1940-1945 are particularly concerned with the preservation of what they see as the "true" history and they tell it to Hungarian young people.

393

Also, the importance of old history books must not be underestimated. In the Hungarian community of Dumbrava and M~mhstireni, for example, a few old history and geography textbooks, dating from before 1920 when grandparents or great-grandparents were at school, are passed from hand to hand. During the communist regime, these books were hidden in barns and lofts. But young people who were interested could always leaf through them and read them, if they wished. All this was kept rather secret, for the Romanian villagers were not to know. Even today, these books are not kept in the living room but are hidden away.

Ethnic myths and legends are also spread by religious practice. Where ethnicity and religion are inextricably mixed, priests play a very specific role in guarding the ethnic border} ~ From interviews with Hungarian clergymen, it appeared they were absolutely convinced of the Hungarian interpretation. Because clergymen have considerable authority in the villages, they can pass on their ideas quite easily among the members of their community. Besides, they are in a position to pass down their views to the Calvinist Hungarians in their sermons and in Bible classes.

The channels through which Romanian myths are passed on are more or less similar to those of the Hungarian community, the only difference being that the Romanian version is spread more openly because it is the officially recognized historic version of Romanian history.

The most important and most effective way in which myths reach the Romanian people at large is education. In schools, during history lessons, the Romanian version of the history of Transylvania is taught. In the second year of secondary school, for instance, the theory of the Daco-Romanian ancestors is defended tooth-and-nail, and the Hungarian theory is refuted on the strength of references to old historic sources. 22

Yet another way in which Romanian history is reinforced is through the many sites of archaeological excavation. In Cluj-Napoca, one often sees archeologists at work. In June 1994, the extremist nationalist mayor, Funar, had the central town square opened up because there were indications that under this square there were remnants of a Roman settlement. The excavations were to demonstrate that, long

394

before Hungarians arrived in Cluj-Napoca, there were already other people, which would, at least according to Funar, take the edge off the Hungarians' argument. However, Funar's plans triggered a real war between ethnic Hungarians and Romanians because on that very square stood the renowned statue of the Hungarian king Mathias Corvinus. 23 The ethnic Hungarians saw these excavations as an attempt by Funar to water down the Hungarian character of Transylvania and Cluj as much as possible. The whole matter was highly publicized and, also, the villagers of Dumbrava and M~trfistireni were kept up-to-date on developments.

Just like the Hungarian clergymen, the Romanian orthodox priests do their bit to spread their view on history among their faithful. Just one example: one of the orthodox priests of M~nhstireni chose to write a thesis about the village M~zfistur Romhnesc, a small village that is part of the municipality of Mhrfistireni. This is what he writes in the foreword:

When preparing this work I have found something particular, namely that the first orthodox church of Mhrfistur Romhnesc dates from the ninth century . . . . This seems to indicate that there was a Romanian orthodox community before the time the Hungarians came here. It is a proof that the Romanians are the true rulers of Transylvania. 24

Conclusion

The ethnic Hungarians and the Romanians share a number of myths about their ancestors and about their homeland, Transylvania. I fully agree with Anthony D. Smith, who states that the core of ethnic identity is made up of a "myth-symbol complex," consisting of myths, symbols, historical memory and key values. According to Smith, myths and symbols guarantee the preservation and the passing down to future generations of ethnic identity. 25 The main problem with the ethnic Hungarians and the Romanians of Transylvania is that their convictions are not compatible, they are even contradictory. In the ethnic Hungarians' view, Transylvania is in fact Hungarian, but it was taken from them by Romania in 1920. According to the Romanians, Transylvania is Romanian but for centuries mistakenly considered as

395

Hungarian by the Hungarians. The historical myths are part of the Hungarian as well as the Romanian collective consciousness. They strengthen cohesion within these groups but, as the convictions are incompatible, they widen the gap between them. In my view, these contradictory views are an additional cause of the current mutual oversensitivity, the mutual suspicion and mutual ignorance which characterize the relation between the two ethnic groups. I think that the success of the Romanian nationalist parties such as the PUNR and Romania Mare 26 among the Romanian villagers of Transylvania 27is partly due to their exploitation of these contradictory myths.

However, the differing oral traditions in the villages do not cause open conflicts. That everyone in his own group passes on his own version helps to explain this. In mixed villages like Dumbrava and Mhrff~stireni, the sensitive issues are not discussed in ethnically mixed groups. Virtually everything to do with history is suppressed in the day-to-day life of the village. Nevertheless, that does not stop one ethnic group from gossiping about the other. Thus, mutual distrust persists. Such a sense of fear is a dangerous breeding-ground because it can easily be exploited by nationalist parties. When anything occurs in politics which appeals to these feelings of fear and distrust, two fronts are lined up in no time. This actually happened as a result of the controversy about the archaeological excavations in Cluj.

Fortunately, there is a sufficiently large number of people who realize that this is pointless and who see through the extremist nationalist party leaders' malice. Bearing in mind the tragic example of the former Yugoslavia, they advocate understanding and peaceful interethnic co-existence.

I have touched on only one of several conditions for ethnic survival and revival: the shared historical myths. Research in this field is essential if we are to begin to understand, and, thus, perhaps to alleviate, the many social and political problems in this area.

396

Notes

1.

,

3.

.

.

,

7.

.

9.

10.

11. 12.

13.

For simplicity, the terms "ethnic Hungarians" and "the Hungarian minority" are used interchangeably to refer to Romanian citizens of Hungarian origin. The ethnic Hungarians refer to themselves with the name Magyars. Anuarul statistic al Romdniei 1992, (Bucuresti: Comisia National& pentru statisticS, 1992), p. 94. Other minorities include: 409,723 Gypsies (1.8 percent)*, 119,436 Germans (0.5 percent), and 66,833 Ukrainians (0.3 percent). Furthermore, there are a lot of other ethnic minorities who make up less than 0.1 per cent of the Romanian population. Most observers agree that the census figure for Gypsies (Roma) does not accurately reflect the size of the Gypsy population. Some estimate their number at over 2 million in Romania, which, if accurate, would make them the country's largest minority. For a discussion of the difficulties in estimating the size of the Roma minority, see: Elena Zamfir and C&t~din Zamfir, Tigani fntre ignorare si ingrijorare (Bucuresti: Editura Alternative, 1992), pp. 52-63; Helsinki Watch, Destroying Ethnic Identity: The Persecution of Gypsies in Romania (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1991), p.5. According to the census of 1992, there are 1,144,820 Roman-Catholics and 801,577 Calvinists in Romania. These two religions are the most practiced among the Hungarians. In some regions, for example, in the counties Covasna and Harghita, most Hungarians are Roman-Catholics, while in other regions the majority are Calvinists. The latter is the case for the region where I did my fieldwork. In the villages Dumbrava and Mhnhstireni, where I stayed. All Hungarian inhabitants are Calvinists. Helsinki Watch, Struggling for Ethnic Identity. Ethnic Hungarians in Post- Ceausescu Romania (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1993), p.3. Ibid., p. 1 and 3. Anthony D. Smith, "Chosen Peoples: Why Ethnic Groups Survive," Ethnic and Racial studies, vol. 15, no. 3 (1992), p. 438. Ibid. Project on Ethnic Relations Report. Romanian-American Symposium on Inter-Ethnic Relations (Bucharest, June 1991), pp. 3-5. B61a K6peczi ed., Chambers-Makkai a.e. trans., History of Transylvania (Budapest: Akad6miai Kiado, 1994), pp. 109-114. Ibid., pp. 183-191. For the Hungarian view, we refer a.o. to K6peczi ed., Chambers-Makkai trans., History of Transylvania; Peter Pal Varady, Erd#ly. Magyar templomai. Kalotaszeg (Budapest: Unikornis Kiado, 1991). Interesting analyses of the Romanian interpretation of history are to be found in Ruth Benedict, "History as It Appears to Rumanians," in Margaret Mead and Rhoda M6traux eds., The Study of Culture at a Distance (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1953), pp. 405-415; Stephen

397

14.

15.

16.

Fischer-Galati, "Myths in Romanian History," East European Quaterly, vol. 15, no. 3 (1981), pp. 327-334; Paul E. Michelson, "Myth and Reality in Rumanian National Development," International Journal of Rumanian Studies, vol. 5, no. 2 (1987), pp. 5-33; Alexandru Zub, "History and Myth in Rumanian Society in the Modem Period," International Journal of Rumanian Studies, vol. 5, no. 2 (1987), pp. 35-58; Dennis Deletant, "Rewriting the past. Trends in contemporary Romanian historiography," Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 14, no. 1 (1991). For the Romanian view we refer a.o. to: Nicolae Iorga, Histoire des Roumains et de leur civilization (Paris, 1920); Constantin C. Giurescu, Istoria rom~nilor, 3 vol. (Bucuresti, 1935-1940); Constantin C. Giurescu, La Transylvanie (Bucarest, 1943); I. Lupas, La Transylvanie, coeur de la vie roumaine (Bucarest: Les 6ditions Dacia, 1942); Constantin Daicoviciu & Miron Constantinescu, Br~ve histoire de la Transylvanie; Bibliotheca Historica Romaniae Monographies III (Bucarest: Editions de l'acad6mie de la R6publique socialiste de Romanie, 1965); Miron Constantinescu & Stefan Pascu, Relations between the autochthonous population and the migratory populations on the territory of Romania, Bibliotheca Historica Romaniae Monographs XVI (Bucuresti: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania, 1975). George Sch6pflin & Hugh Poulton, Romania's Ethnic Hungarians. A report by the Minority Rights Group (London: Expedite Graphic Limited, April 1990), p. 8. In recent years this polemic has flared up again. A lot of works, mainly published in Romania, Hungary and North America (Florida) are the result of it, for instance: Paul Abrudan, Transylvania. Documente istorice--fn lumina adevdrului (Bucuresti: Editura Tara noastrh, 1991); Anne Marie Codrescu trans., Mircea Eliade, Les Roumains. Precis historique, (Bucarest: Editions Roza vinturilor, 1992); C. Sassu, Romanians and Hungarians. Historical premises (Cluj-Napoca: The Romanian Cultural Foundation, 1993); David Prodan, Transylvania and again Transylvania. A Historical Expos~ (Cluj-Napoca: The Romanian Cultural Foundation, 1992); Nicolae Stoicescu, The Continuity of the Romanian People (Bucuresti: Editura stiintifich si enciclopedic~, 1983); Silvia Popovici ed., Romania. Foreign sources on the Romanians (Bucharest: General Directorate of the State Archives of Romania, 1992); S. Pascu and M. Musat and F. Constantiniu, "Romanian Historians on Transylvania," in Gale Stokes ed., From Stalinism to Pluralis:. A Documentary History of Eastern Europe since 1945 (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991) pp. 229-232; Julia Nanay, Transylvania: The Hungarian Minority in Rumania (Florida: Danubian Press, 1976); Ida Bobula, Origin of the Hungarian Nation (Florida: Danubian Press, 1982); E. Haraszti, Origin of the Rumanians (Vlach Origin, Migration and Infiltration to Transylvania) (Florida: Danubian Press, 1977); T. Golea, Transylvania and Hungarian Revisionism--A discussion of Present-Day Developments (Florida: Romanian Historical Studies, 1988);

398

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25. 26.

27.

V. Stef~nescu-Drhg/mesti, Romanian Continuity in Roman Dacia --Linguistic Evidence (Florida: Romanian Historical Studies, 1986); S. Mehedinti, What is Transylvania? (Florida: Romanian Historical Studies, 1986). A number of these books about the region of Kalotaszeg are: Joszef Farogo, Jen6 Nagy and G6za Vamszer, Kalotaszegi Magyar N~pviselet (1949-1950) (Bukarest: Kriterion K6nyvkiado, 1977); Peter Pal Varady and Aniko Borb61y, Kalotaszeg Felszeg (Budapest: Zrinyi Nyomda Kiadoja, 1989); Peter Pal Varady and Borb61y Aniko, Kalotaszeg. Alszeg, Nadasmente, Kapus Vid~ke, Atmeneti videk (Budapest: Zrinyi Nyomda Kiadoja, 1990); Peter Pal Varady & Aniko Borb61y, Erd~ly. Magyar templomai. Kalotaszeg (Budapest: Unikornis Kiado, 1991). Arpad Balind, Kelemen tanar ur el6adasa a Maguargyeri~monosto ri templomrol (Mhnhstireni, 1992), pp. 1-2. Florica Vasaru, Monografia folkloric?t a comunei Mdndstireni. Lucrare de diploma. Unedited thesis (Cluj: Universitatea Babes-Bolyai, Facultatea de Filologie, 1961), pp. 5-6. Andrei Muresianu, Desteaptd-te Rom6ne! lmnul de stat al Romdniei (Bucuresti: Editura muzicalfi, 1990). (Emphasis added.) Anthony David Smith, The Ethnic Origins of Nations (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986), pp. 35-37. Istoria romfmilor din cele mai veche timpuri pfn?t Ia revolutia din 1821. Manual pentru clasa a VII-a (Bucuresti: Editura didactic~ si pedagogic~t, 1994), pp. 59-73. For a more detailed explanation about this issue, see the article of Michael Shafir, "Ethnic Tension Runs High in Romania." RFE/RL Research Report, vol. 3, no. 32 (August 1994), pp. 24-32. Ciprian T. Rus, Monografia satului Mdndsturu-Rom~nesc. Tezfi de licen~ in Teologie. Unedited thesis (Cluj-Napoca: Universitatea Babes-Bolyai, Facultatea de Teologie pastoralh), pp. 1-2. Smith, The Ethnic Origins of Nations. PUNR is the abbreviation of Partidul Unitdtii Nationale Romdne or The Party of Romanian National Unity. Partidul Romdnia Mare means the Greater Romanian Party. In the February 1992 local elections right-wing nationalists won the mayoralty in Cluj-Napoca. More about the success of these parties in Transylvania, see: Michael Shafir, "The Politics of Intolerance. Romania." RFE/RL Research Report, vol. 3, no. 16 (April 1994), pp. 87-91 and Dennis Deletant, "The role of Vatra Rom~neasch in Transylvania." Report on Eastern Europe, no. 5 (February 1991), pp. 29-30.