No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The National Unity of the Romanians and the Breakup of the Austro-Hungarian Empire
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2009
Extract
Both in their scholarly writings and at conferences such as those at Indiana University in 1966 and Bratislava in 1967, historians have expressed the opinion, which has been unanimously accepted, that the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian empire must be mainly ascribed to the centrifugal role of the non-German and non-Magyar nationalities in that empire. Relegated to the rank of second-class subjects of the Habsburg emperor by the privileged classes of the dominant German and Magyar nations, the Slavic and Latin nationalities enjoyed fewer political privileges than the Germans and Hungarians, suffered from discriminations that impeded the growth of their cultural potentialities, and were subjected to various economic measures that handicapped the development of their economies. Historians are also agreed that the lack of economic unity of the Dual Monarchy was another important reason for the collapse. Furthermore, the majority of specialists on Habsburg history attribute a considerable portion of the blame for the dissolution of the Habsburg realm to the nationality policies pursued by the government in the Transleithanian half of the monarchy. The repression of the non-Magyar nationalities by the privileged classes in Hungary stimulated the growth of national liberation movements among the oppressed nationalities and prompted them to intensify their struggle, first, for equal rights, then for national autonomy, and, finally, for self-determination.
- Type
- The Disintegration of the Habsburg Monarchy: Some Semi-Centennial Reappraisals
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Center for Austrian Studies, University of Minnesota 1968
References
1 In a speech delivered in 1910. See István, Tisza, Discursuri 1898–1915 [Speeches, 1893–1915] (Budapest, 1915), pp. 50–53Google Scholar. The Italian historian Leo Valiani emphasizes the importance of the existence of an independent Kingdom of Romania to the development of a strong national feeling among the Romanians in Transylvania in his La dwsoluzione dell' Austria-Ungheria (Milan: Il Saggiatore, 1966), pp. 61–62Google Scholar.
2 For the text of the memorandum, see Păcăţian, Teodor V., Cartea de Aur [The Golden Book] (8 vols., Sibiu, 1904–1915), Vol. VII, pp. 513–546Google Scholar. For the memorandum movement, see P[app], I. P., Procesul Memorandului [The Memorandum Trial] (2 vols., Cluj: Editura Buletinul Justiţiei, 1933–1934)Google Scholar; Vasile, Netea, Istoria Memorandului [The History of the Memorandum] (Bucharest: Fundafta Eegele Mihai I, 1947)Google Scholar; Zenovie, Pâclişanu, “Guvernele ungureşti si mişcarea memorandistă a românilor din Ardeal” [The Hungarian Government and the Memorandum Movement of the Transylvanian Romanians], Revista Fundaţiilor Regale, Vol. I (1945), No. 5–7Google Scholar; and Ştefan, Pascu, Din răsunetul procesului memorandist în masele populare [The Repercussions of the Memorandum Trial among the Masses] (Sibiu, 1944)Google Scholar. For the repercussions of the memorandum movement in Europe, see Georges, Moroianu, Lea luttes des Roumains de Transylvanie pour la liberté et l'opinion européenne (Paris: J. Gambier, 1933)Google Scholar; Urechia, V. A., Voci Mine [Latin Voices] (Bucharest, 1894)Google Scholar; and Dimitrie, Braharu, Chestiunea românâ în Italia in timpul Memorandului [The Romanian Question in Italy at the Time of the Memorandum] (Sibiu: Cartea Românească, 1942)Google Scholar.
3 Stefan, Pascu, “Relations roumaino-slovaques dans la dernière decennie du XIXe siècle” Revue romaine d'histoire, 1968, No. 2Google Scholar.
4 Suciu, Ioan D., “Aspecte ale colaborării Partidului Naţional Român din Transilvania cu mişcarea socialistă” [The Collaboration between the Romanian National Party of Transylvania and the Socialist Movement], Studii, Vol. XXI (1968), No. 1Google Scholar.
5 Eliza, Campus, “La lutte pour l'achèvement de l'unité nationale roumaine (1914–1916),” Revue roumaine d'histoire, 1965, No. 4Google Scholar; E. Eribes, “La rencontre de Constantza du 14 juin 1914,” ibid., No. 2.
6 Constantin, Kiriţescu, Istoria războiului pentru întregirea României [The History of the War for the Unification of Romania, 1916–1918] (2nd ed., 3 vols., Bucharest: Casa Şcoalelor, 1926)Google Scholar; Constantin, Kiriţescu, La Roumanie dans la guerre mondiale (Paris: Payot, 1934)Google Scholar.
7 Petru, Nemoianu, Prima Alba-Iulia. Voluntarii români în războiul pentru întregirea neamului [The First Alba-Iulia. Romanian Volunteers in the War for the Unification of the Nation] (Timişoara: Poporul, 1923)Google Scholar.
8 Mandrescu, Simion C., În Franţa şi Italia pentru cauza noastră [In France and Italy on Behalf of our Cause] (Bucharest: C. Stetea, 1919)Google Scholar; Campus, “La lutte pour l'achèvement de l'unité nationale roumaine.”
9 Valiani, La dissoluzione dell'Austria-Ungheria, pp. 393–413.
10 Vasile, Stoica, În America pentru cauza românească [In America on Behalf of the Romanian Cause] (Bucharest: Universul, 1926)Google Scholar; Moroianu, Les luttes des Roumains de Transylvanie pour la liberté.
11 See especially the newspaper La Roumanie (Paris), Vol. I, No. 35 (September 12, 1918)Google Scholar; 39 (October 10, 1918); 40 (October 17, 1918); 42 (October 21, 1918); and 43 (November 7, 1918).
12 The original copy of this declaration can be found in the archives of the Historical and Archaeological Institute at Cluj.
13 Silviu, Dragomir, Un sfert de veac de la Unirea Transilvaniei cu România [A. Quarter Century of Union of Transylvania with Romania] (Sibiu, 1943)Google Scholar.
14 See Adevărul, 1918, No. 40 (October 20, 1918).
15 Ion, Clopoţel, Revolufia din 1918 şi Unirea Ardealului cu România [The 1918 Revolution and the Union of Transylvania with Romania (Cluj: Societatea de Maine, 1926)Google Scholar.
16 Ion, Nistor, Unirea Bucovinei [The Union of Bucovina] (Bucharest, 1928), pp. 86–90.Google Scholar
17 A copy of this proclamation is located in the archives of the Historical and Archaeological Institute at Cluj.
18 A copy can be found in ibid.
19 Tiron, Albani, Douăzeci de ani de la Unire [Twenty Years of Union] (Oradea, 1938)Google Scholar; Clopoţel, Revoluţia din 1918 şi Unirea Ardealului cu România; Vasile, Liveanu, Din istoria luptelor revolufionare din România [1018. The History of Revolutionary Struggles in Romania] (Bucharest, 1960)Google Scholar.
20 See Telegraful Român (Sibiu), 1918, No. 117 (November 1–14,1918)Google Scholar; and La Roumanie, Nos. 43 (November 7, 1918) and 45 (November 30, 1918).
21 Nistor, Unirea Bucovinei, pp. 102–114.
22 Telegraful Român (Sibiu), 1918, No. 120 (November 4–14,1918)Google Scholar.
23 Adevărul, 1918, No. 43 (October 28-November 10, 1918).
24 Marea Unire de la 1 Deeembrie [The Great Union of December 1] (Bucharest, 1943), pp. 34–38.Google Scholar
25 Ibid., pp. 49–51.
26 Telegraful Român (Sibiu), 1918, No. 123 (November 10–20, 1918)Google Scholar; Marea Unire de la 1 Decembrie, pp. 49–76.
27 Adevărul, 1918, No. 14 (November 12–25, 1918); Ion, Clopotel, Frămîntările unui an. 1918 [The Anxieties of a Year] (Sibiu: Consinzeana, 1919), pp. 63–65.Google Scholar
28 Carl, Göllner, “Die Stellungsnahme der Siebenbürger Sachsen zur Vereinigung Transylvaniens mit Rumänien,” Forschungen zur Volksund Landeskunde, 1960, No. 2, pp. 29–38.Google Scholar
29 Nistor, Unirea Bucovinei, pp. 168–180.
30 Marea Adunare Naţională întrunită la Alba Iulia în ziua de 1 Decembrie 1918. Acte şi documente [The Great National Assembly of December 1,1918, at Alba-Iulia] (Cluj: Fondul Cărţilor Funduare, 1928)Google Scholar.
31 Ibid.
32 Siebenburgwche Deutsche Tageblatt, January 21, 1919; loan, Lupaş, Lecturi din izvoarele istoriei romane [Readings in the Sources of Romanian History] (Bucharest, 1929), pp. 210–211.Google Scholar
33 Banater Bote, July 1, 1919; Wahrheit, July 13 and 21, 1919; Lupag, Lecturi din izvoarele istoriei române, p. 293.