CHAPTER XXXI

Roumania’s early history--Michael the Brave--Stephen the Great--A Spartan mother--Brancovan’s noble efforts bring about his end--Oppression promotes union--Greek extortion--Russia and Turkey--The Westernising of Roumania--The Treaty of Paris--The European Commission--The new State of Roumania--Prince Cuza and his fall--The siege of Plevna--Roumania’s present aims.

I had been some time resident in Roumania before I made any study of the history of the country and its people. I found authentic material very difficult to obtain, and had continually to reconstruct the information I assimilated.

Roumanian history did not attract me until I came to know and appreciate the people; and if I have (as I sincerely hope is the case) enabled my readers to share my interest in some degree, I now owe it to them to give some slight historical account of our allies and of the land which they inhabit. Indeed, it is necessary to know something of the history of the country before we can appreciate the causes which were the determining factors of Roumania’s participation in the war. It is a country with a future full of hope and promise, and it deserves to be better known than it is.

Roumania was, as its name implies, a colony of ancient Rome. It has been suggested that it was a penal colony, but of this there is certainly no authentic proof. Many Roumanians hold the belief that they are, as a people, descended from the Roman colonists of the time of Trajan, but those of them who are versed in history do not by any means make a definite claim to this effect.

Before the Roman epoch very little indeed is known of the country, and the scanty historical accounts concerning it are conflicting. With the thirteenth century begins the authentic history of the two principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, but it is by no means the history of a united people. These two principalities developed on distinct lines, and each had its separate annals.

Later on, as they fell under the dominion of the Turk, a more uniform system of administration was adopted, native princes governing in both, but always subject to and under the control of the Porte. Of these native princes the most important were Michael the Brave, Stephen the Great, and Constantine Brancovan.

On the Boulevard in Bucarest there stands a fine bronze equestrian statue of Michael the Brave, Prince of Wallachia. He it was who in concert with the then Prince of Moldavia partially freed the country from the Turks. His plans for the aggrandisement of his country succeeded so well that he invaded Transylvania, seized the reins of government, and secured his proclamation as prince of that province. Transylvania was afterwards conquered by the Hungarians, and ever since it has been the ardent wish of every Roumanian to regain this desirable territory.

After the death of Michael, the Turks gradually regained their old power over the country, a succession of princes reigning over it who were still obliged to buy their appointment at Constantinople.

Stephen the Great, Prince of Moldavia, was also a man of great courage and resource. In one of his campaigns against the Turks his army at first was forced to give way, and he is said to have fled to his own castle for refuge. Upon his demand for admission, a lattice opened and his mother appeared. She, like the Spartan mother of old, refused to admit him, seeing he came not as conqueror but conquered.

Her words animated both him and his followers to such a degree that they resolved to die rather than yield. They marched once more against the foe, and defeated them completely, forcing them to recross the Danube.

Constantine Brancovan, Prince of Wallachia, considerably furthered the internal well-being of the country, which had never been so prosperous as during his reign. But this prosperity, becoming known at Constantinople, only increased the exactions of the Turks. Notwithstanding that all the demands were punctually met, the Sultan thought that Brancovan was becoming too powerful, and therefore an envoy was sent to Bucarest with instructions to depose him. The Prince was conducted to Constantinople and quietly beheaded, and after his execution the Turks introduced a new system. The line of national princes ceased. Those who were now appointed were mostly Greeks, the office being sold to the highest bidder.

Hereupon ensued a period of grinding oppression, the Greeks squeezing as much as they could out of the peasantry, the consequence being that numbers of them emigrated. By degrees the two principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia came to recognise the need for a closer union in face of the common foe.

Towards the close of the eighteenth century the Russo-Turkish war took place, at which time Austria profited by the situation to arrange with both parties for the cession of Bukovina, a richly wooded province of Moldavia. At the conclusion of peace Russia restored all the Danubian principalities to the Sultan, but with certain stipulations in favour of Wallachia and Moldavia. The treaty, however, was shortly afterwards violated by the Turks, who recommenced their old system of extortion, till, in 1802, Russia once more asserted her treaty rights in favour of the oppressed inhabitants. It was at this time that the Turks ceded Bessarabia, a fertile province of Moldavia, to the Czar.

Although these arrangements were made with the Turks, the ostensible rulers of the two principalities, Russian influence still seems to have been predominant. Indeed, until the beginning of last century the Russian consul at Bucarest was all-powerful. The revolutionary movement of ’48 extended even to the two principalities--their real object being the overthrow of Russian influence. In order to quell the disturbance Russian troops entered the country, whereupon the reigning princes fled to Vienna, leaving the government to their ministers. Great suffering was at this time inflicted on the inhabitants, but finally the Austrians induced the Russians to withdraw.

One important consequence of the rebellion was the banishment of many rising politicians to Western Europe, where they were brought into contact with a higher type of civilisation. Statesmen received their political training abroad, and returned to educate their countrymen.

The practice then began of sending Roumanian students to French, German, and Italian universities. To this fact we may attribute the rapid progress of Roumania as compared with the other Balkan States.

I may here incidentally remark that D. Stourdza in one of his articles strongly repudiates the assumption that Roumania is one of the Balkan States.[3]

The Treaty of Paris guaranteed the privileges of the two principalities, whilst still recognising the suzerainty of the Porte. As a little sop to their pride, part of Bessarabia, which had been taken by the Russians, was now restored to Moldavia.

The Great Powers at this stage decided to keep a protecting eye upon the two principalities, and therefore a European Commission was formed to revise the existing laws and statutes, taking at the same time into consideration the opinions of the representative councils of the country.

At the first sitting the councils voted unanimously for the union of the two principalities in a single state under the name of Roumania, to be governed by a foreign prince from one of the reigning houses of Europe.

To this the European Commission, recognising that union is strength, declined to agree, deciding that the principalities should continue to be governed by their own princes. But the Roumanians were too clever for the Commission, and succeeded in getting their own way by the simple device of both principalities electing the same prince, namely, Prince Cuza. And thus it was that the union of the two provinces was accomplished.

At the beginning of his reign Cuza reigned very wisely. Reforms in many departments were due to him, and he founded the universities of Bucarest and Jassy.

Later on he tried, unfortunately for himself, to concentrate all power in his own hands. This caused great dissatisfaction, and his dissolute conduct increased his unpopularity. The leading statesmen thereupon conspired to dethrone him. The palace was quietly entered one night, the Prince awakened out of sleep and informed of their decision. There was no use protesting. He allowed himself to be escorted to the frontier, then proceeded to Italy, where he died some years later. His widow returned to Roumania, and died there only a few years ago.

So secretly had the plans of Prince Cuza’s deposal been carried out that very few people were aware of what had happened till next morning, when the news ran like wildfire through the capital. How his successor was appointed has been told in the romantic story of the advent of King Carol.

The siege of Plevna took place during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877. The Russians sustained several defeats at the hands of the Turks, and the outlook for them was decidedly gloomy, when the Roumanians under Prince Carol crossed the Danube and came to their help.

At first the Russians were inclined to treat the small Roumanian army with scant regard, considering it “a contemptible little army,” but the soldiers soon showed of what mettle they were made (just as the men of our own “contemptible little army” did), and under the efficient leadership of Prince Carol speedily succeeded in turning the tide of victory.

One would have thought that the Russians would show themselves grateful to the friend in need. Their “gratitude” was shown by the announcement that they intended to regain possession of the portion of Bessarabia which had been ceded to Moldavia after the Crimean War, giving the Roumanians in exchange the Dobrudja as far as Constantza. As Bessarabia is a very fertile province, whilst the Dobrudja is just the contrary, this proposed exchange aroused great indignation at Bucarest, but, as is too often the case, might served instead of right, and the Roumanians were finally obliged to yield. For a long time after this relations with Russia were strained, some of the leading statesmen even trying to promote a better understanding with Austro-Hungary. But the strong anti-German feeling in the country worked against this, and finally various other causes contributed to a sort of passive preference for Russia.

FOOTNOTES:

[3] This view does not, however, by any means meet with general acceptance. In conversation recently with a highly-placed Roumanian of scholarly attainments, this gentleman argued convincingly that Roumania is, beyond doubt, one of the Balkan States. Every great movement in the Balkans, he pointed out, has originated in Roumania, or has at least been participated in by that country.