Rumanian Translation of Hungarian Articles, From a Noted Hungarian History Magazine

Here is a rare chance for Rumanian reading persons to have a glimpse on historical articles related to Transylvania, published in a noted Hungarian history periodical, 'História'.
Transilvania văzută în publicistica istorică maghiară - Momente din istoria Transilvaniei apărute în revista História:
http://adatbank.transindex.ro/cedula.php?kod=40

Gen. Dénes

I readed the articles and from the begining i realised that they are 200% hungarian propaganda.
Example: at page 21, (with italics in original!!) " Românii s-au format la sud de Dunare" (romanian genesis was performed on the southern regions of Danube".

Of course, every one can read and form the own opinion, but one last remark: the articles are not sustained with bibliography.

Thanks for "the rare chance" given to romanians to read, in their own native language, such "professional" and "historical" informations.

This post has been edited by 21 inf on March 18, 2007 09:07 am

Excerpt from the preface: "Dorim în primul rând să-l informăm pe cititor, nu să-l convingem" (i.e., first of all, we would like to inform the reader, not to convince him/her). That's exactly why I posted the link.

In order for the two sides to attempt to build bridges - which is about time - they must know each other's point of view. These articles serve this purpose.

Personally, I would appreciate similar translations of historical articles, which show the Rumanian point of view. Believe me, many Hungarians would be equally surprised when reading studies written by Rumanian historians on topics of mutual interest.

Knowing both sides' point of view could be the start of the long-awaited reconciliation in this contentious area as well.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on March 18, 2007 01:02 pm

No conciliation will ever be possible when politics (I speak about Romanian one) is dominated by PNG & PRM while other can't even figure out how to tackle the "Moldavian issue" . And I'm sure that same is the case in Hungary if FIDESZ will find again the road to the government control. So, as long as we have this kind of people, conciliation (because that was never really attempted before) is only a distant dream. I am in favor of this and I'll be the first to jump in this boat but I'm afraid this is not possible.Add to this mix the fact that people in other Romanian provinces know about szekely only the fact that they want autonomy (center directive,obviously) and you have the whole picture. 70% of Romanians questioned put Intorsura Buzaului in Buzau and Comandau being some control point.
I read all the articles, some of them don't make sense to me (that doesn't mean that for somebody else they don't make sense), with some points I agree and some I don't (poster before already pointed out one of them). And, honestly, what conciliation we are talking about? Between PRM and FIDESZ or between Ion & Janos? Because it seems to me that the late two have no dispute whatsoever (except who's paing the next round in 'birt').

Romanian politics dominated by PRM and PNG? Where?

Another question is what conciliation are we talking about. The two communities are not killing eachother and the hungarians are represented in Parliament and Government. So what's there to conciliate? There are some hungarians that want to change the territorial status-quo, but I don't see that as a step towards conciliation, on the contrary. You know the saying "din lac in put".

take care

Just a side note. Zayets, you're making a fundamental error here. FIDESZ is not the equivalent to PRM or PNG, but rather MIÉP (Magyar Igazság és Élet Párt, i.e., The Party of Hungarian Justice and Life) is. FIDESZ is a centre right party, not an extremist one.

By reconciliation, I actually meant the two parties' perspective on history, not actual politics or everyday life and interpersonal contacts (which, apparently, based on what I am reading on the 'net, is not rosy either).

Gen. Dénes

P.S.

In a way they're right, as Intorsura Buzaului actually is not part of the histroical 'Sekler Land'. It was artificially included in the region during the redrawal of the counties, during Communism.

This post has been edited by Dénes on March 19, 2007 03:48 pm

According to the last polls , thes two parties make up for at least 30% (some say more) from total votes. That's huge.Whether they will remain in opositioon (as PRM always did) is just a question of wait and see.
@Denes, you might be right regarding FIDESZ but allow me to have some doubts regarding ALL so called "liberal, centre right parties" in all ex-communist countries. Of course they are not extremists but they can be anything but liberal. They are a sick joke of what is called today "transition" , capitalism ruled by coummunists. Oxymoron in the best of cases.

Ah ok, but until those polls morph into real votes in the next elections, we can't say the 2 parties are dominating Romanian politics. PNG is not even in Parliament, as you well know.

take care

It was not about PRM.
But bcos u mentioned it, anyway, y not to mention also UDMR?

And also bcos one said about "secui", they are not hungarians at origins.
"Secui" was a profession, not a nation. They were "maghiarizati" during centuries,
and they hardly can speak oficial hungarian language.
They themselves dont want to be mixed (confused) with hungarian nation.

About reconciliation: try to ask people from Ip and Traznea, Salaj county, Romania. Try to ask them about conciliation. I bet one will b surprised about what are they thinking; both romanians and/or hungarians.

If it is posible in XXI century, after joining UE, now, when there are no borders anymore in Europe, for a nation as hungarians still to ask for independence of Transylvania (province of Romania), wich is against the laws of Romanian state, u name the IQ and intentions of this kind of ppl.

21 inf dixit!

It would be nice if someone may elaborate a little on this subject, as I don't get it.

(I understand "engineering" as a profession... )

I am not Hungarian/Szekely 21inf. I was born in Sighisoara, Transylvania and I do believe this province will fare of way better without rule from the "center". But coming to the subject, never heard Szekely claiming independence of Harcov alone , not to mention Transylvania. Transylvania demographics was heavily altered after WWI. Now it's impossible for Hungary to even control it, let alone assimilate it. So, this argument doesn't stand up.
Let me tell you about people of Ip, Traznea and even Moisei. They don't give a flying snack about what you say because 90% of them are working in Italy, Spain and France. Sure, there are the elder people remembering the atrocities committed by horthyst and most probably every year they commemorate this. Why do you think they don't want to pass this? Why do you insult them suggesting that they are still living in the past? Afterall they are the de facto AND moral winners. Although I am myself skeptic about conciliation, I can't understand why people reject it without even taking in consideration.Well, infinitus est numerus stultorum.

This post has been edited by Zayets on March 22, 2007 08:00 am

It would be nice if someone may elaborate a little on this subject, as I don't get it.

It's pretty simple (although it is 0% truth in what 21inf says) . By the same logic, Romanians,Saxons are also professions. He just read the first phrase in "what about Szekely".That is, "fine warriors" . Don't forget though that by the time Unio Trium Nationum was signed, Szekely was a nation (Romanians were excluded, in Transilvania that is). Origin of Szekely is not 100% known. There are many sources claiming different things. One thing is sure, each and every Szekely will adhere to Hungarian culture. I guess that pisses of all party members and instant patriot found on every tv show.

This post has been edited by Zayets on March 22, 2007 09:50 am

There are still political borders in Europe.

In my opinion conciliation is not obtainable, at least not by changing the status quo, since the s.q. is liked by one side and disliked by the other. Changing it would only pass the flame of discontent to the other party.

I will not react to 21 inf.'s diatribe, only to Zayets' point.

The Unio Trium Nationum was not formed specifically against the Rumanians. It was formed by privileged classes (very few of which were Rumanian) against serfs (almost all Rumanians and most Hungarians were serfs). Remember, back then the notion of 'nation' in its current meaning did not exist. It had a different meaning. Only social class, wealth and religion counted, ethnicity did not. Therefore, Rumanians were not excluded from UTN per se. Serfs were.

That is correct.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on March 22, 2007 02:13 pm

Well, although UTN was not formed specifically against Romanians (Universitas Valachorum) it serve basically this purpose. That's because almost all Romanians were serfs and only a fraction from what was called Universitas Hungarorum were serfs. Don't forget that UTN state persisted until the end of WWI (I will not detail here what UTN stated),basically the second largest ethnic group in Transylvania was denied every politic and social act. Szekely didn't had any serfs (same as the Saxons). Also, UTN "punishes" the non-Catholic Romanians ( they did not have to pay taxes to the bishop) directly making them "tolerated".
BUT! I have to say this here (and this is only my oppinion- probably others have the same oppinion) : UTN was not an alliance against Romanians. Or say, Romanian nation. Simply because Romanian nation was not existing at that time. Sure, there was some vague ethnic conscience but you can't call that a nation. Even during Mihai the Brave rule one can't speak about Romanian nation. Or even Hungarian nation. This is the speach of CVT , Ghitza Funar and alike and I take very much distance from such a stance. I'm "Transilvanean"(thus I know what I'm saying because I lived there) even if I have Romanian passport.

BTW : Unio Trium Nationum doesn't even appears with this name in its text. In the pact, this is called Fraterna Unio.First reading of the text shows that first part is dedicated to logistics problems in case of war, then the rest states that these three estates will help each other against inside ("launtric") enemy as well as foreign enemy.

This post has been edited by Zayets on March 22, 2007 02:58 pm