The Foundation And Development Of The Rumanian Principalities

The first attempt to organize itself into a political entity was made by

the Rumanian nation in the thirteenth century, when, under the impulse of

the disaffected nobles coming from Hungary, the two principalities of

'Muntenia' (Mountain Land), commonly known as Wallachia and 'Moldavia',

came into being. The existence of Rumanians on both sides of the

Carpathians long before Wallachia was founded is corroborated by

con emporary chroniclers. We find evidence of it in as distant a source as

the History of the Mongols, of the Persian chronicler, Rashid Al-Din,

who, describing the invasion of the Tartars, says: 'In the middle of

spring (1240) the princes (Mongols or Tartars) crossed the mountains in

order to enter the country of the Bulares (Bulgarians) and of the

Bashguirds (Hungarians). Orda, who was marching to the right, passed

through the country of the Haute (Olt), where Bazarambam met him with an

army, but was beaten. Boudgek crossed the mountains to enter the

Kara-Ulak, and defeated the Ulak (Vlakh) people.'[1] Kara-Ulak means Black

Wallachia; Bazarambam is certainly the corrupted name of the Ban Bassarab,

who ruled as vassal of Hungary over the province of Oltenia, and whose

dynasty founded the principality of Muntenia. The early history of this

principality was marked by efforts to free it from Hungarian domination, a

natural development of the desire for emancipation which impelled the

Rumanians to migrate from the subdued provinces in Hungary.



[Footnote 1: Xenopol, Histoire des Roumains, Paris, 1896, i, 168.]



The foundation of Moldavia dates from after the retreat of the Tartars,

who had occupied the country for a century (1241-1345). They were driven

out by an expedition under Hungarian leadership, with the aid of Rumanians

from the province of Maramuresh. It was the latter who then founded the

principality of Moldavia under the suzerainty of Hungary, the chroniclers

mentioning as its first ruler the Voivod Dragosh.[1]



[Footnote 1: The legend as to the foundation of Moldavia tells us that

Dragosh, when hunting one day in the mountains, was pursuing a bison

through the dense forest. Towards sunset, just when a successful shot from

his bow had struck and killed the animal, he emerged at a point from which

the whole panorama of Moldavia was unfolded before his astonished eyes.

Deeply moved by the beauty of this fair country, he resolved to found a

state there. It is in commemoration of this event that Moldavia bears the

head of a wild bison on her banner.]



The rudimentary political formations which already existed before the

foundation of the principalities were swept away by the invasion of the

Tartars, who destroyed all trace of constituted authority in the plains

below the Carpathians. In consequence the immigrants from Transylvania did

not encounter any resistance, and were even able to impose obedience upon

the native population, though coming rather as refugees than as

conquerors. These new-comers were mostly nobles (boyards). Their

emigration deprived the masses of the Rumanian population of Transylvania

of all moral and political support--especially as a part of the nobility

had already been won over by their Hungarian masters--and with time the

masses fell into servitude. On the other hand the immigrating nobles

strengthened and secured the predominance of their class in the states

which were to be founded. In both cases the situation of the peasantry

became worse, and we have, curiously enough, the same social fact brought

about by apparently contrary causes.



Though the Rumanians seem to have contributed but little, up to the

nineteenth century, to the advance of civilization, their part in European

history is nevertheless a glorious one, and if less apparent, perhaps of

more fundamental importance. By shedding their blood in the struggle

against the Ottoman invasion, they, together with the other peoples of

Oriental Europe, procured that security which alone made possible the

development of western civilization. Their merit, like that of all with

whom they fought, 'is not to have vanquished time and again the followers

of Mohammed, who always ended by gaining the upper hand, but rather to

have resisted with unparalleled energy, perseverance, and bravery the

terrible Ottoman invaders, making them pay for each step advanced such a

heavy price, that their resources were drained, they were unable to carry

on the fight, and thus their power came to an end'.[1]



[Footnote 1: Xenopol, op. cit., i. 266.]



From the phalanx of Christian warriors stand out the names of a few who

were the bravest of a time when bravery was common; but while it is at

least due that more tribute than a mere mention of their names should be

paid to the patriot princes who fought in life-long conflict against

Turkish domination, space does not permit me to give more than the

briefest summary of the wars which for centuries troubled the country.



It was in 1389, when Mircea the Old was Prince of Wallachia, that the

united Balkan nations attempted for the first time to check Ottoman

invasion. The battle of Kosovo, however, was lost, and Mircea had to

consent to pay tribute to the Turks. For a short space after the battle of

Rovine (1398), where Mircea defeated an invading Turkish army, the country

had peace, until Turkish victories under the Sultan Mohammed resulted, in

1411, in further submissions to tribute.



It is worthy of mention that it was on the basis of tribute that the

relations between Turkey and Rumania rested until 1877, the Rumanian

provinces becoming at no time what Hungary was for a century and a half,

namely, a Turkish province.



In a battle arising following his frustration--by means not unconnected

with his name--of a Turkish plot against his person, Vlad the Impaler

(1458-62) completely defeated the Turks under Mohammed II; but an

unfortunate feud against Stephen the Great, Prince of Moldavia, put an end

to the reign of Vlad--a fierce but just prince.



A period of the most lamentable decadence followed, during which Turkish

domination prevailed more and more in the country. During an interval of

twenty-five years (1521-46) no less than eleven princes succeeded one

another on the throne of Muntenia, whilst of the nineteen princes who

ruled during the last three-quarters of the sixteenth century, only two

died a natural death while still reigning.



In Moldavia also internal struggles were weakening the country. Not

powerful enough to do away with one another, the various aspirants to the

throne contented themselves with occupying and ruling over parts of the

province. Between 1443-7 there were no less than three princes reigning

simultaneously, whilst one of them, Peter III, lost and regained the

throne three times.



For forty-seven years (1457-1504) Stephen the Great fought for the

independence of Moldavia. At Racova, in 1475, he annihilated an Ottoman

army in a victory considered the greatest ever secured by the Cross

against Islam. The Shah of Persia, Uzun Hasan, who was also fighting the

Turks, offered him an alliance, urging him at the same time to induce all

the Christian princes to unite with the Persians against the common foe.

These princes, as well as Pope Sixtus IV, gave him great praise; but when

Stephen asked from them assistance in men and money, not only did he

receive none, but Vladislav, King of Hungary, conspired with his brother

Albert, King of Poland, to conquer and divide Moldavia between them. A

Polish army entered the country, but was utterly destroyed by Stephen in

the forest of Kosmin.



Having had the opportunity of judging at its right value the friendship of

the Christian princes, on his death-bed Stephen advised his son Bogdan to

make voluntary submission to the Turks. Thus Moldavia, like Wallachia,

came under Turkish suzerainty.



For many years after Stephen's death the Turks exploited the Rumanian

countries shamelessly, the very candidates for the throne having to pay

great sums for Turkish support. The country groaned under the resultant

taxation and the promiscuousness of the tribute exacted till, in 1572,

John the Terrible ascended the Moldavian throne. This prince refused to

pay tribute, and repeatedly defeated the Turks. An army of 100,000 men

advanced against John; but his cavalry, composed of nobles not over-loyal

to a prince having the peasant cause so much at heart, deserted to the

enemy, with the result that, after a gallant and prolonged resistance, he

suffered defeat.



Michael the Brave, Prince of Muntenia (1593-1601), was the last of the

Vlakhs to stand up against Turkish aggression. This prince not only

succeeded in crushing a Turkish army sent against him, but he invaded

Transylvania, whose prince had leanings towards Turkey, pushed further

into Moldavia, and succeeded in bringing the three Rumanian countries

under his rule. Michael is described in the documents of the time as

'Prince of the whole land of Hungro-Wallachia, of Transylvania, and of

Moldavia'. He ruled for eight years. 'It was not the Turkish sword which

put an end to the exploits of Michael the Brave. The Magyars of

Transylvania betrayed him; the German emperor condemned him; and a Greek

in Austria's service, General Basta, had him sabred: as though it were

fated that all the enemies of the Rumanian race, the Magyar, the German,

and the Greek, should unite to dip their hands in the blood of the Latin

hero.'[1] The union of the Rumanian lands which he realized did not last

long; but it gave form and substance to the idea which was from that day

onward to be the ideal of the Rumanian nation.



[Footnote 1: Alfred Rumbaud, Introduction to Xenopol, op, cit., i. xix.]



The fundamental cause of all the sufferings of the Rumanian principalities

was the hybrid 'hereditary-elective' system of succession to the throne,

which prevailed also in most of the neighbouring countries. All members of

the princely family were eligible for the succession; but the right of

selecting among them lay with an assembly composed of the higher nobility

and clergy. All was well if a prince left only one successor. But if there

were several, even if illegitimate children, claiming the right to rule,

then each endeavoured to gain over the nobility with promises, sometimes,

moreover, seeking the support of neighbouring countries. This system

rendered easier and hastened the establishment of Turkish domination; and

corruption and intrigues, in which the Sultan's harem had a share, became

capital factors in the choice and election of the ruler.



Economically and intellectually all this was disastrous. The Rumanians

were an agricultural people. The numerous class of small freeholders

(moshneni and razeshi), not being able to pay the exorbitant taxes, often

had their lands confiscated by the princes. Often, too, not being able to

support themselves, they sold their property and their very selves to the

big landowners. Nor did the nobles fare better. Formerly free,

quasi-feudal warriors, seeking fortune in reward for services rendered to

their prince, they were often subjected to coercive treatment on his part

now that the throne depended upon the goodwill of influential personages

at Constantinople. Various civil offices were created at court, either

necessitated by the extension of the relations of the country or intended

to satisfy some favourite of the prince. Sources of social position and

great material benefit, these offices were coveted greedily by the

boyards, and those who obtained none could only hope to cheat fortune by

doing their best to undermine the position of the prince.