THE NATIONALITIES PROBLEM IN TRANSYLVANIA 1867-1940

Most of the Hungarian high schools represented Hungarian traditions. Roman Catholic, Calvinist and Unitarian boarding schools could trace their history back to the 16th century. The Roman Catholic boarding schools of Aiud, Odorheiu Secuiesc, and Alba Iulia could also boast of several centuries of a brilliant past, while the Romanian high schools, except for the one at Blaj, had never played a political role of nation-wide significance. While it is true that the erstwhile leaders of the Hungarians of Transylvania graduated from these schools, the schools and their faculty served primarily cultural ends and did not engage in politics. Nor did their role change under the Dual Monarchy. Many a leading politician of future Greater Romania completed his studies in Hungarian denominational high schools without being ostracized or harmed in any way on account of his nationality. There were some Romanian complaints against certain professors at the college of Ordstie after 1905, but none of an ethnic nature against the schools at Cluj or the Calvinist boarding school at Zalau.

Thus Hungarian denominational schools were no particular threat to the Romanian state. In spite of this, after 1923, Romanian educational policies placed the operations of these schools under a real yoke. We have already noted those measures limiting the financial basis of the schools and preventing their restaffing. Apart from these measures the Romanian authorities did everything within their power to ensure the advance of a Romanian spirit, while repressing Hungarian culture and values within these schools.

In 1923, with his ordinance number 100.090, Minister of Education Anghelescu introduced in addition to the study of the Romanian language, the teaching of Romanian history, geography, and

571

government in Romanian as well. These prescriptions were preserved and reinforced in the form of legislation by the Act on Private Education and further laws affecting secondary schools, so that the four subjects had to be taught in Romanian throughout the regime.

The application of the law, along with complementary legislation was intended to ensure increasing space for the Romanian language and spirit. The concept of Anghelescu and other Romanian cultural politicians was to strengthen the patriotic education of minority children by teaching these four so-called national subjects in Romanian. In his French language publication issued in order to convince public opinion abroad, Silviu Dragomir observes, in the name of the Romanian government, that they had introduced the teaching of the four national subjects in Romanian into the minority schools because these constitute ,'the best means to develop a self-conscious citizenry." ²³ It is hard to believe, however, that the Romanians were sincere in this regard. After all, during the Hungarian regime, they had protested for decades against the introduction of Hungarian language as a subject into the Romanian denominational schools. And it was only a matter of the Hungarian language, for in the Romanian high schools of Balazsfalva, Brasso or Naszod all subjects, apart from Hungarian, were taught in the students' Romanian mother tongue; and even the graduation examination was administered by their own teachers in their mother tongue, except for Hungarian language and literature. Hence they must have been aware that learning the language of the state does not promote a self-conscious citizenry. Most assuredly the Romanian cultural leaders had decreed the teaching of the four national subjects in Romanian in order to take up most of the time and spiritual energy of the students, and thus weaken or negate the impact of learning in their mother tongue.

The measures issued by the Ministry of Education regarding the educational policies of the minority high schools confirm this interpretation. The government decided the language of instruction, the methods of instruction, its subjects and the number of hours devoted to each. The secondary schools had to adjust to the official curriculum prescribed for public secondary schools. Each subject was taught in the same number of hours as in the public schools. Only textbooks that had been approved by the Ministry could be used. The teachers had to teach each subject in the prescribed number of hours, and it never happened that the number of contact hours in any subject taught in some Hungarian school would differ from the number of contact hours in the public school. Romanian language and literature was taught more extensively than any other subject. This subject, as well as the

572

Romanian "national" subjects had to be taught with the greatest enthusiasm. The Ministry decreed that the "national subjects be scheduled in the morning between 8 and 11 a.m., and be indicated by red ink in the schedule of courses." The Romanian inspectors would consider first of all the subjects underscored in red ink during their visits.

Comments on the effectiveness of the teaching of the national subjects was always the most important segment of the report on these visits. Since these subjects played the most important role on the minor graduation examination administered at the end of the fourth year as well as on the graduation examination at the end of the eighth, naturally the high school students devoted most of their time and talents to learning these subjects. After 1934 the Romanian spirit prevailed in the teaching of other subjects too. The law was modified once again to take the administration of the first general examination out of the hands of the teachers at minority schools. According to the restrictions imposed by Anghelescu, a committee of teachers from other schools, appointed by the Minister, was to decide which student could be admitted to the fifth year of secondary school. The four national subjects and the results obtained in them became even more important to the students after 1934. Often a Hungarian student had to be content with completing four years of secondary, since professors unknown to him gave a failing grade on the minor graduation exam, which was a prerequisite for the fifth year. The difficulties confronting Hungarian students even exceeded those confronting other minorities because they could not use their mother tongue in four of the five subjects composing that examination.

Learning these subjects in Romanian rendered the work of the minority Hungarian schools extremely difficult. The syllabi for these courses were most extensive. The textbook for Romanian language and literature in the lower division of the secondary schools extended over an average of 200 to 300 pages, whereas in the upper division it was 500 to 600 pages. The textbooks for history and geography comprised 250 to 300 pages each. The contents of these textbooks, which could be written only by ethnic Romanians, were mostly antagonistic or even definitely anti-Hungarian. Hungarian children not only had to make enormous efforts to learn these subjects, but underwent psychological tortures as well. Moreover, these subjects were taught mostly by native Romanian teachers, since the Ministry of Education seldom awarded a license to teach these subjects to members of the Hungarian minority. In 1929 the leaders of the Roman Catholic Status of Transylvania requested, in a memorandum to the Maniu cabinet, that the issue be

573

decided fairly. "There must be an end to the abuse of denying minority teachers, graduates of Romanian universities, a license to teach the Romanian national subjects or the French language." ²⁴ Unfortunately the request made little difference because teachers of Romanian background received a significant salary differential for teaching in Hungarian secondary schools. The Reformed Church District of Transylvania alone paid 2.4 million lei to the Romanian teachers it was compelled to hire to teach the national subjects and French in the academic year 1927-28. In some years the Hungarian schools spent up to 6.7 million lei on salaries to Romanian teachers, which sum exceeded the government subsidy authorized by the regime of the National Peasant Party.

In addition to giving enhanced importance to the national subjects, the Ministry of Education did everything to promote Romanian ideas in the teaching of other subjects as well. Every event taught during the course on world history was viewed from a Romanian perspective. Onisifor Ghibu, professor of Romanian didactics and methodology at the University of Cluj, called this perspective "Romanocentric" and felt it should be mandatory in all schools. Romanocentrism became one of the main criteria for authorizing new textbooks. Issues involving a debate between Romanians and Hungarians had to be taught in the spirit of "continuity" of the Romanian presence; the issue of Romanian uprisings was taught according to the official Romanian concepts. Latin had to be pronounced according to the rules of Romanian pronunciation.

Romanian educational policies extended to the supervision of the students at Hungarian schools even outside the classroom. In 1927 the Minister ordered "the prior censorship of the manuscript of final report cards," requested "the list of books awarded for outstanding performance on examinations, and ordered that the programs for school celebrations be submitted for prior approval," because it wanted to deprive even these occasions from serving as an opportunity for the manifestation of the Hungarian spirit. The report of the Presiding Council of the Reformed District of Transylvania, having reprinted the above orders, adds that the Romanian authorities "take the leadership of the school out of the hands of the church even as regards the most insignificant matters. Soon no right will remain us other than to provide the salaries of the faculty. ²⁵

Indeed, this evolution of the spirit of the Hungarian secondary schools could only come about because Romanian educational policy was bent on eliminating the former autonomy enjoyed by the Hungarian schools completely. Literally the only right remaining to those in charge of the schools was to come up with the funds for the upkeep of

574

the schools. But even in this area the Hungarian schools did not benefit from all the opportunities that had been available to the Romanian schools under the Hungarian regime. The Ministry prohibited the use of the premises of Hungarian secondary schools such as the auditorium and conference rooms for any purpose other than instruction. The one time a collection was organized for the benefit of Hungarian denominational schools, the collection was forbidden.

By prescribing "national" subjects and by the strict control over the teaching of these subjects, Romanian educational policy intended to promote the education of Romanian citizens. At the same time, by its strict control over the subjects taught in Hungarian it intended to repress any possible manifestation of irredentism: in general, it was bent on eliminating any opportunity that might serve to promote the development of Hungarian national consciousness or its consolidation. The various types of educational inspectors and controllers seemed to organize get-togethers at one Hungarian school or another. 'The inspector generals, the chief inspectors, the secondary inspectors, the special inspectors for the instruction of Latin, of music, etc.," we read in the above-mentioned report:

are busy exercising the right of state control. At the final examination in one of our schools four sets of inspectors happened to meet. They take one-sided notes regarding the results of our examinations and if any of their observations require rectification, this can be done only through protracted and usual personal interventions on our part. ²⁶

According to the prevailing decrees the final report cards had to be in both Romanian and Hungarian. The text of the report card had to be submitted to the Romanian authorities and could only be printed upon obtention of their approval. The Romanian text always had to come first, whereas the Hungarian text had to appear on the back, as something barely tolerated. By keeping track of the books awarded to the most successful candidates, Romanian school authorities were able to force the officials at Hungarian secondary schools to present the good students with Romanian books in addition to the Hungarian ones. This of course posed no threat to the attitude of the children much because they usually abstained from reading the Romanian books, but it did occasion additional expense to the school because it felt obliged to purchase the books demanded by Romanian entities. The procurement of the Romanian flag, of the Romanian national seal, etc., also caused

575

additional financial hardship; as mentioned, such items were provided free of charge to Romanian schools by the Hungarian authorities.

Under the circumstances Hungarian culture could manifest itself only in very moderate ways in the Hungarian secondary schools. Hungarian language was never a mandatory subject on any official examination. It did not figure as a subject at the end of the fourth year, nor on the graduation examination, albeit Romanian language and literature was one of the subjects on the graduation examination in former times. Romanian educational policy carried out what Hungarian policies had not even dreamt of, that the Ministry be in charge of preparing the curriculum even for the subjects taught in the mother tongue of the students at minority secondary schools. Hungarian language and literature could only include material mentioned in the official curriculum issued by the Ministry of Education. Some aspects of Hungarian history could be mentioned in connection with world history or Romanian history, but there was no possibility for the Hungarian students to study their true history in the Hungarian secondary schools since the establishment of Greater Romania. So-called literary conferences were authorized to study issues in literary history. These conferences included readings and recitations.

Study groups with by-laws and formal organization could not exist, as we have seen. Self-development could only take place at the cost of enormous overwork. Yet studying overtime and a more thorough approach to certain subjects was a rather frequent phenomenon in the case of the most outstanding students. Hungarian student groups, inspired by their professors, turned towards the research of Hungarian culture with increasing enthusiasm. They could see with their own eyes and experience personally in Hungarian society that in Romania, Hungarians could attain their ends only by working better and harder than the Romanians. Their professors and church leaders constantly emphasized the need for "meliorism," the predominance of quality over quantity. What is important is not how many of you there may be, they were told, but rather how you are and what inner values you represent. This emphasis on values bore visible fruit. At the religious conferences held at secondary schools the students had the opportunity to discuss individual, religious, and national problems. Thus the intellectual life of the students of Hungarian secondary schools undoubtedly reached a higher level, in their thorough approach and study of issues, than that of students before the war. The better students who attended the denominational schools benefited from a broader and more profound education than their counterparts before the war. This applied, however, only to the small number of outstanding students. The greater

576

majority was under constant intellectual pressure as a result of the difficulties of bilingual education and did not have the spiritual energy or the time for any deliberate tackling of serious issues. The Hungarian culture, especially its historical aspects, and Hungarian orthography of this majority were sorely lacking. Whoever was inclined to study some problem more thoroughly, for instance some issue of Hungarian history, had to do it at home, or in some library, since this was impossible at school. Consequently these students became thoroughly absorbed in Hungarian history. They viewed the various problems of Hungarian history with a fresh perspective, free of all illusions, enriched by their own social and national experiences.

The sharply anti-state irredentism that formerly characterized the Romanian secondary schools of Hungary was almost completely absent from the inner life of Hungarian secondary schools. There was not a single case where an investigation revealed legitimate grounds for charges of irredentism within Hungarian denominational secondary schools. Considering that all textbooks had to be previously authorized by the Ministry, including books on religion, irredentism in instruction could not manifest itself in any way. Nor could those in charge of the schools have allowed it, since supervision was almost continuous and any attempt at irredentism would have entailed the immediate closing down of the school. Occasionally some high school received a warning on the grounds of irredentism. For instance, the Calvinist boarding school of Cluj received a warning because its students had been singing Hungarian songs in the fields during a visit to old Kingdom of Romania, even though they had not been singing the anthem nor any other song regarded by the Romanians as irredentist such as the Kossuth song, but simple folksongs. Likewise the Roman Catholic high school of Odorheiu Secuiesc received a warning, and even lost its accreditation for a year, because its students got involved in a brawl with the students of the local Romanian high school after a soccer match, and the latter were beaten. The Calvinist high school of Aiud also received a warning because the Romanian inspector visiting during a history class received an answer to one of his questions which seemed to imply a degree of rejection of the notion of the continuity of the Romanian presence in Transylvania. Such cases, usually termed ',irredentism," were the grounds for the charges brought up against Hungarian secondary denominational schools.

After 1935 the so-called Country Guard, a centrally-directed educational institution of the Romanian youths, was introduced into some Hungarian denominational schools. This institution was a large-scale experiment designed to place the youth of the entire nation under

577

the impact of strongly nationalist and centrally directed education. The didactic principles of the Country Guard were: respect for the Romanian royal family, respect for the Romanian flag, the practice of certain half-pagan half-Christian rituals, emphasis on physical education and, above all, a unified nationalism. At the beginning of every week the Romanian national flag had to be hoisted on the flagpole in the courtyard of Hungarian schools, under ceremonial circumstances, and lowered at the end of the week in a similar manner. The ritual was punctuated by Romanian slogans, by an exhorting speech in Romanian and by an "Our Father Who Art in Heaven" recited in Hungarian. ²⁷ Since the recital of Our Father was the only part of the ritual that everybody liked, it was only natural that the greatest attention was devoted to it by the students, especially when the student selected to recite the prayer reached the very meaningful phrase: "and deliver us from evil." This introduction of the Romanianizing educational institution was surely not in the interest of the Romanian state and its educational goals.

Surveying the area covered by the so-called (so-called, because there was really no purely Hungarian secondary school) Hungarian secondary instruction, we must conclude that the various secondary schools could satisfy the cultural needs of the Hungarian population only in part. It was primarily the full-fledged high schools that stood at the focus of public interest. Hungarian society should have been most interested in ensuring instruction in the Hungarian language in specialized schools, but because of their limited numbers and their inadequate funding these schools could not satisfy the expectations of the population, whereas Hungarian students were increasingly excluded from the public schools, most of which used Romanian as the language of instruction. The public commercial and vocational schools provided instruction exclusively in Romanian from the very beginning, even in towns inhabited mainly by Hungarians. The enrollment of Hungarian students declined steadily at these schools. According to the data published in the anniversary yearbook issued by the Maniu regime Hungarian students and other non-Romanians formed 90.9% of the students at the public commercial schools in 1918-19, in the areas attached to Romania. By 1922-23 this figure had dropped to 52%, in 1925-26 to 25.8%, and in 1926-27 to 24.5% as opposed to 75.5% Romanians. In the vocational schools the decrease in the number of non-Romanian students was even more pronounced. In 1919-20 there were 39.1% Romanians as opposed to 60.9% non-Romanians, but in 1924-25 there remained but 9% non-Romanians, and in 1927-28 their proportion had dropped to 6.6% even though the ratio of the Hungarian

578

population in these areas reached 259b, even according to the Romanian statistics. Thus Hungarian high school students were excluded not only from the Hungarian schools, but from the Romanian schools as well. In the academic year 1936-37 there were 164,603 students attending 626 public secondary schools of various types. Only 4,655 or 2.7% were Hungarian, although 13,003 would have corresponded to the ratio of the Hungarian population of the country. Thus each year there were 8,348 fewer Hungarian high school students than what the Hungarian population would have been entitled to by their numbers. Correspondingly, as regards regular high schools, the Hungarians should have been represented by 6,455 students among the 81,714 in the country as a whole, in the year 1937-38. Instead, there were altogether 2,020 Hungarian students attending regular high school. Thus the losses to Hungarian society amounted to several thousand graduates in this area as well.

There were 132 Hungarians among the 24,877 students at state teacher's training schools in 1926-27 (0.7%); since the Hungarian minority amounted to 7.9% of the total population, the proportionate number of students would have been 1,964. Those who gained entrance to public schools were supported by the state, where 443 students received free room and board provided from funds of other institutions. The 1,837 Hungarian youths who were excluded from the teacher's training schools did not benefit from these advantages. There were 405 Hungarians among the 21,307 students attending state commercial schools in the academic year 1926-27 (i.e. 2%), although there should have been 1,683 in proportion to the Hungarian population. Thus 76% of Hungarians were excluded from the commercial schools. ²⁸

At the beginning there were Hungarian sections at some public schools, but these were phased out gradually. At the end the only Hungarian section still in operation was the one at the Manuit Gojdu high school in Oradea, but even there only a few subjects were taught in Hungarian.

The so-called agricultural schools played a special role among the Hungarian vocational schools. These schools were established after 1930, and they were the only type of secondary school that had not existed before World War I. The first such school was established by the Unitarians at Cristuru Secuiesc in 1930, followed in 1935 by the Roman Catholic school at Tirgu Secuiesc and the Reformed school at Ciumbrud. The Roman Catholic school at Iernut functioned from 1933-34. The agricultural schools were open only in the winter, when the intelligent youths from the villages were registered for continuing education and trained in various agricultural pursuits. Unfortunately, the status of

579

these schools remained in limbo for a long time; the agricultural school at Ciumbrud was granted accreditation by the Ministry of Education only in 1940.

In some areas the needs of the greatest masses of Hungarians were not satisfied in the least. The various specialized schools, including vocational, commercial, agricultural and home economics schools usually hired only teachers of Romanian background, and none of these schools had Hungarian as their language of instruction. Particularly prejudicial to the health of the Hungarian masses was the circumstance that there were no midwifery schools with Hungarian as the language of instruction anywhere, and thus the Hungarian villages remained completely without trained midwives. As mentioned, even in this area the Hungarians were far worse off than the Romanians had been under Hungarian rule where, according to the data provided by Ghibu, training in midwifery was available in Romanian.

The fate of the Hungarian University of Cluj was undecided at the time of the change of sovereignty. For the time being the Hungarian professors remained at their post, and most of their courses were taught in the academic year 1918-19. Although the advancing Romanian troops occupied Cluj already by the end of December 1918, they did not interfere with the university for a while. Nicholae Iorga, the historian and other Romanian celebrities were of the opinion that the Hungarian population of a million and a half deserved a Hungarian university; thus some did not wish to harm the Hungarian university, but rather to organize a Romanian university alongside it.

At the prompting of Onisifor Ghibu, however, the opinion of the ruling Romanian circles soon changed, and on May 12, 1919, the Hungarian University of Cluj was taken over by force on behalf of the Romanian state and reopened in the following academic year as a Romanian state institution. The Hungarians decided to set up a Hungarian University with the combined strength of all the Hungarian churches, on the basis of the principles of the Minority Treaty and the decisions of Alba Iulia. This Hungarian university, referred to as the Interdenominational University did indeed open on October 20, 1920. Those in charge duly reported its foundation to the Ministry which, for the time being, merely acknowledged the fact without objecting. But a few months later a professor at the Romanian University of Cluj wrote an article against the Hungarian University and described its

580

establishment as a provocation against the Romanian state. Soon the general mood was such that at the end of the 1920-21 academic year the government closed down the university forever. As Onisifor Ghibu was to admit later, the existence of the Hungarian University could not be tolerated because it would have offered too much competition to the fledgling Romanian university and, in Ghibu's opinion, the Romanians did not as yet have the wherewithal to compete.

Thus only the theological institutes and the Romanian universities remained to satisfy the needs of the Hungarians for higher institutions.

All three Hungarian denominations had their theological institutes for centuries. During the Romanian regime the Reformed and Unitarian institutes were at Cluj, the Roman Catholic theological school at Alba Iulia. In the long run the clerical career was the only one that remained for Hungarian youths where they could start to obtain a diploma without having to take an entrance examination. There were no limitations set on enrollment during most of the Romanian period, and these institutes remained available to the end to satisfy the needs of Hungarian youth.

After the signing of the Treaty of Trianon the leaders of the Hungarian churches took an oath of loyalty to the King of Romania, and the churches were recognized by the state. Soon it was possible to obtain state subsidies for the theological institutes, and their faculty received their government pay regularly throughout the Greater Romanian regime. Of course, the maintenance and repair of the buildings was the responsibility of the diocese and the Hungarian churches received no assistance specifically for this purpose. In fact, some of the buildings of the theological institutes, such as many buildings of the Reformed institute at Cluj, were requisitioned by the Romanian housing office and for over ten years became the headquarters of various government offices. Only under the Maniu regime did they finally succeed in liberating the buildings for their original purpose.

Unlike the previous Hungarian government, the Romanian government did interfere in matters of theological instruction, already in 1922. By its decree 6.046 of February 10 the Minister of Religious Affairs and education ordered the Unitarian and Calvinist theological institutes to teach Romanian language and literature, for two hours a week each, from March 1, 1922 on. History classes in Romanian were strictly mandatory and the seminarians were examined in this subject, as in various theological subjects. A religious spirit prevailed throughout at the public ceremonies of the seminarians and they

581

avoided any item on their programs that might have offended the sensitivities of the Romanian government authorities.

The situation of Hungarian students attending Romanian universities was difficult from the beginning. For a long time they were almost unable to make headway in the antagonistic atmosphere. In the first years very few Hungarian candidates even dared register at a Romanian university. During the first decade, from 1919 to 1929, there was an average of 2,461 students attending the University of Cluj. Of these, 208 were Roman Catholic, 106 Calvinist, and 16 Unitarian Hungarians. From a comparison of the number of Romanian and Hungarian students attending other universities it becomes clear that several hundred Hungarian students were excluded from the universities as well, each year. According to the statistics on education contained in an official publication of the Ministry of Education, altogether 823 degrees in law were awarded at the four Romanian universities between 1925 and 1929. If the Hungarian population had been duly represented, Hungarian students should have earned 65 diplomas, whereas only 12 of them did. Thus the Hungarian population had 53 fewer law graduates every year. Of the 457 medical degrees awarded each year the Hungarian students should have earned 36; instead, only four did, which meant that the Hungarian population lost 32 graduates in medicine each year. Hungarian students should earned 10 of the 134 diplomas in pharmacology awarded each year, and in this field the Hungarians did earn the number of diplomas commensurate with their ratio of the population. As regards doctorates in philosophy the Hungarians should have earned 39, but obtained only six, losing 33 Ph.D.'s a year. The Hungarians should have earned 23 of the 297 degrees in science awarded each year, but obtained only three. Each year the Hungarians came up short by 102 degrees of various kinds, including 41 doctorates. hence their intellectual losses amounted to 80.3%. ²⁹

These data indicate that far fewer Hungarian students studied and obtained diplomas from Romanian universities than what their ratio of the total population would have entitled them to. Thus the replacement of Hungarian professionals fell short by almost three-fourths. This halting of the replacement process was not the result of natural evolution. Impoverished as it was, Hungarian society could seldom afford the many kinds of expenses involved in university studies. This was particularly true as regards students from a rural background. The funds of the ecclesiastic and social foundations which served to provide for them were lost as a consequence of the land reform, while the Romanian state provided very few scholarships to young Hungarians.

582

There was yet another reason for the small number of Hungarian university students: the entrance examination. After 1930 some departments would admit only students who had passed a stiff entrance examination. From 1934 on, a Hungarian student could be admitted to the School of Medicine only by way of exception, as a result of acquaintance with some distinguished professor. This amounted to open, rather than veiled "numerus clausus" as regards the Hungarian students, who found themselves excluded from the universities in even greater proportions from then on.

When Anghelescu returned to head the Ministry of Education, towards the end of 1933, this old representative of Romanian chauvinism did not delay in coming up with fresh measures against Hungarian university students. Noting from the statistics that the overwhelming majority of the students in the School of Pharmacology at the University of Cluj were of Hungarian background, he closed down that school in the Fall of 1934 and transferred it to the University of Bucharest. Thus he barred many Hungarian students from the possibility of continuing their studies, since the students from Transylvania could ill afford to complete their studies far away from home. ³⁰ The consequence was as expected; the number of Hungarian candidates in pharmacology diminished rapidly.

Romanian educational policies not only prevented the existence of a university with Hungarian as the language of instruction but made it more difficult for Hungarian students to study at Romanian universities year after year, especially after 1930. By introducing the entrance examination in 1934 it almost completely barred candidates of other than Romanian background from the possibility of studying medicine.

Students at Romanian universities attempted to organize after the first few years. They felt that since the Romanians had been free to organize in Budapest under the Dual Monarchy and cultivate their national consciousness within the Petru Maior Student association, Hungarian students should also have the right to establish a student association on a national basis. Once again they were wrong. The university authorities barred them from organizing on a national basis by degree. There was no association of Hungarian students at any university during the interwar period.

Many enlightened Romanians did not approve of such a solution of the issue of the Hungarian student associations. In 1932 Ghita Pop, Undersecretary of Religious Affairs in the Maniu cabinet, openly condemned the policy of barring Hungarian student associations. He confronted Prime Minister Iorga who, in agreement with the Romanian

583

university authorities at Cluj, rejected the application of the Hungarian students requesting permission to organize. Ghita Pop wrote as follows:

I would feel it a dereliction of duty on my part if I did not point out in a few lines how mistaken is the argument propounded by the prime- minister in the Senate against the establishment of minority student associations.

I find it necessary to declare from the start that this article was not inspired by a spirit of contradiction. The minorities problem is far more important and complex than to serve as a gimmick in aimless party struggles. Quite apart from all this, whatever the momentary stand taken by Professor Iorga, he can rightfully expect not to be mistaken for a street corner nationalist.

Although it was precisely Iorga who was responsible for the theoretical and actual spread of Romanian nationalism before the war he never committed the mistake so characteristic of the loud and superficial nationalist after the war. The mistake of continuing to confront those nations with whom we had to fight, first in the political arena, then militarily, in order to win our national freedom, in the same antagonistic tone.

As I assess sincerely this attitude of Iorga, I nevertheless feel bewildered by his rejection of the petition filed by Senator Jozsef Sandor recommending the authorization of minority student associations.

This is not the place to argue the theory of freedom of association for national minorities. Since this right is recognized in practically all nation-states. The possibility for minority students to establish associations on a national basis also derives from this general right. If citizens belonging to minority groups who are not students at any university are free to join economic, trade, cultural, scientific, and even political associations and, indeed, they take advantage of this right, since their party participates in elections with an official slate of candidates, their candidates do get elected to parliament, it is absurd and senseless to make an exception of university students. When a few years ago the University of Cluj decreed that Hungarian university students may not organize along national lines I could hardly believe that professors who had been subjected to Hungarian oppression in Transylvania should fall into the same error. No matter how strong this term may appear, this struck me as an atrocity.

584

Student associations do not have and cannot have a political character; their objectives can only be cultural, educational, or comradely. The minority student cannot be forbidden from being interested in his literature and culture, or from developing himself within the framework of literary and scientific associations like the Romanian students do, for after all this is the calling of a university student. He cannot be forced to sign up with Romanian associations and live in a purely Romanian environment, unless he sincerely feels such a need. The matter becomes even more serious if what Dimineata claimed the other day is true, that the Romanian associations reject those minority students who wish to join. Is it wise and well-considered to awaken within the minority students from Transylvania or Bessarabia a feeling of persecution and deprivation of rights? And if one day we should uncover secret student organizations, should we not blame ourselves if the minority students refer to the misconception that they were forced to embark on this wayward road by our policies? Would it not be better to authorize such associations, which could be checked at any time since they would be operating legally, rather than promote some underground organization operating without controls, which could easily embark upon dangerous political tendencies?

But let us turn from theoretical debates to the realm of action. Our critics who constantly blame us for "defending" the minorities, intend to disarm us with much the same argument. They keep referring to the past, asking the academic question whether the Hungarians treated us better before the unification, and did they not persecute the Romanian language sufficiently? But their argument does not hold water because the sins committed under former Hungarian rule cannot serve to justify the sins of the new Romanian rule.

In the present instance their arguments are all the more incorrect as they are based on lack of information; for in Austria- Hungary student association could operate freely on a national basis. There were many legally established Romanian student organizations before unification, such as the "Carmen Sylva" in Graz, the "Romania Juna" in Vienna, the "Petru Maior" in Budapest, not to mention any number of Romanian student associations in Cernowitz. "Julia," the Romanian student association of Cluj was dissolved in 1896, as a result of false and ill-intentioned charges raised by the chauvinistic officials of the Hungarian university, if I am not mistaken...

585

Finally allow me to formulate the basic principle of the minority policy of the Romanian state: we must not indulge in a treatment worse than what we had been subjected to before unification in any area of the broad conglomeration of minority issues in the pertinent provinces. Secondly, we must not consider the rights granted to the oppressed Romanians in former times as the maximum that can be granted to our own minorities, but only as a minimum state of affairs and of law, let us grant them more rights rather than less than those enjoyed by ourselves in our time of servitude.

I cannot believe that Mr. Prime Minister would object to these basic principles and therefore I am confident that his loyalty and goodwill will find the means to rectify the mistake. ³¹

But Ghita Pop's confidence in the goodwill of Iorga proved unwarranted. True, the Iorga cabinet soon fell, but its successors were in no hurry to realize the principles enunciated by Pop. The issue of Hungarian student associations remained unresolved during the entire Romanian regime. A few years later the students at the Romanian University of Cluj were discreetly informed that the officials would be willing to authorize a student association of Hungarian character under the name "Szekely-land and vicinity." Yet the projected student association never materialized, because official authorization was not forthcoming. The Hungarian students by then were so wary of the intentions of the university that they did not resort to the method proposed; they feared that by stressing "Szekely-land" the officials were intent on dividing the Hungarian student body. Therefore they did not push for the establishment of the association on the conditions offered. Lacking associations catering to Hungarian students, the latter engaged in cultural and study activities through various religious associations. Thus the situation foreseen by Ghita Pop in his article was realized in part: Hungarian university students found room within church organizations, outside the jurisdiction of the university authorities. In fact the students were better off, for thus they avoided even the appearance of engaging in politics, which would not have been so easy within the framework of official student associations. Thus the Hungarian students did not fall into the situation the Romanian students had experienced long ago in becoming the carriers of extremist, and ultranationalist political movement within the Petru Maior and other such Romanian associations. The masses of students who joined the Iron Guard and who, after 1936, confronted official Romania with

586

frightening power and shook the University of Cluj to its foundations, came from the ranks of these student associations. In the course of 1938 and 1939 they organized massive ultranationalist and anti-Semitic political demonstrations and attacked not only politicians but at times their own professors. In 1939 they waylaid the Rector of the University at the corner of some street, with revolver shots. The Rector miraculously survived the attack, but the university officials surely regretted having granted Romanian university students such extensive means for political activity. ³²

Hungarian university students did not take part in such movements. They had to study in earnest in order to pass their examinations in the increasingly unfriendly atmosphere. They prepared for their calling with perseverance, if in diminishing numbers, and this was an enormous boost for the Hungarian population vegetating in untold misery.

The situation of students of Hungarian background attending Romanian universities was rendered most difficult throughout by financial deprivation, the obstacles to admission, and the ban on student organizations for Hungarians. Comparing the situation of the Hungarian university students with that of the Romanian university students attending Hungarian universities during the period of the Dual Monarchy, we note a marked decline in every respect. The financial difficulties experienced by Hungarian students were incomparably more serious. The Romanian students in former times had their tuition expenses covered for the most part by the various scholarship funds, the Gojdu and other foundations. Moreover, the various strata of Romanian society improved year after year financially, ensuring support for the students from home as well. Such financial advantages were not available to Hungarian students. The cultural foundations which might have provided the scholarships lost their resources as a consequence of the Romanian land reforms. Every class of Hungarian society grew poorer from year to year. The few remaining institutions, such as the University Student Board of Clui, were taken over by the Romanian authorities and converted into state institutions. The Kata Bethlen association formed to assist students at Tirgu Mures was also closed down, whereas the Study Foundation of the county of Trei-Scaune was used for purposes other than those originally intended. Hungarian university students could count only on the pennies contributed by members of Hungarian society. Thus assistance to Hungarian students under the Romanian regime could only come from collections; the product of these, as we know, was indeed continuous and at times quite impressive.

587

Moreover, the situation of the Hungarian students was rendered more difficult by restrictions on admissions. They could register at Romanian universities without major obstacles until 1930, but after that it became increasingly difficult for Hungarian students to obtain diplomas from Romanian universities. They seldom dared attend foreign universities nor did they have the financial means to do so because the Romanian government would recognize diplomas obtained abroad only after years of processing. Thus, in this area as well, Hungarian university students were far worse off than Romanian students formerly.

Surveying the evolution of educational opportunities available to Hungarians under Romanian rule we may note that, except for the first two promising years, their situation was increasingly unfavorable year after year. In 1919 the Governing Council of Sibiu launched the direction of educational opportunities for minorities in the spirit of the decisions of Alba Iulia. From 1920, however, when the administration of Greater Romania became centered in Bucharest, the situation of schooling, for Hungarians, deteriorated continuously. The teaching of Romanian, and of the history, geography, and government of Romania was introduced from the start. After 1923 it was no longer easy for Hungarian children to study in their mother tongue. The four national subjects had to be taught in Romanian in every school, and this excessive attention to a foreign language absorbed most of the energies of the Hungarian students during the Greater Romanian period. They could study in their mother tongue only in small part, and the Hungarian denominational schools, deprived of their autonomy by the government, became bilingual throughout.

With the exception of two or three, the Hungarian denominational schools applied for state support in vain. They lost their financial foundation as a result of the Romanian land reform. The churches supporting them became impoverished for the same reason. As a consequence of government measures they lost the advantages that every denominational school had enjoyed under the former Hungarian regime. The franking privileges of the Hungarian schools were withdrawn, teachers and professors no longer received discounts on the railroads and, by depriving the schools of their accreditation, the government brought about a situation in which the Hungarian schools had to incur heavy expenses to pay the Romanian faculty who came to examine the Hungarian children. Further serious expenses were incurred by the requirement to purchase the Romanian national flag, Romanian historical pictures and Romanian books, in contrast to the

588

Hungarian government during the Dual Monarchy when such items were provided to the Romanian schools free of charge.

The situation of the teaching staff became incomparably worse than that of the former Romanian teaching corps on Hungarian territory. Hungarian teaching staff had to survive on minimal salaries. Hungarian teachers never enjoyed the benefits enjoyed by Romanian teachers after 1906 when Apponyi granted them salary subsidies without in the least infringing on the autonomy of Romanian schools. Only exceptionally, could Hungarian teachers teach the Romanian national subjects and they needed ministerial authorization to be so employed. The so-called Capacitate examination, made the replacement of Hungarian teachers and the granting of tenure to young teachers impossible, hence the younger teachers experienced immeasurable misery.

Freedom of instruction did not exist for Hungarian students throughout the period. The right of the parents to select a school of their choice was limited by the arbitrary decisions taken by Romanian educational authorities indulging in the practice of name analysis. Enrollment at Hungarian schools decreased year after year as a result of this analysis and of the requirements regarding admissions. Students of a different religion or nationality could not attend a Hungarian school, and never during the regime could the child of Hungarian citizens attend a Hungarian school in Romania.

The autonomy of Hungarian schools ceased completely as a result of the laws sponsored by Anghelescu. The formerly public Hungarian denominational schools sank to the level of private schools and most of the preparatory schools were unable to obtain accreditation until 1940. As noted by the most significant educational report of the Hungarian churches, the only right remaining to those in charge of the schools was to find ways and means of coming up with the funds to maintain the schools. The autonomy of the Hungarian schools of Romania shrank to absolutely zero, in comparison with the autonomy enjoyed by the Romanians of Hungary during the Dual Monarchy.

In consideration of public opinion abroad, the Romanian state did not prohibit Hungarian denominational teaching, but it did set conditions which made it impossible for these schools to prosper and, in fact, forced these schools to become less and less effective.

The Romanian government explained this strict control over the Hungarian schools to international public opinion by arguing that these were nests of irredentist activities and that, in any case, in most cases these schools were superfluous, since the government, at great expense, maintained public schools with Hungarian as the language of

589

instruction. In reality, however, the public schools with Hungarian as the language of instruction, or with Hungarian sections, gradually ceased to exist, and Hungarian was replaced by Romanian as the language of instruction. By 1938 there was not a single public school with Hungarian as the actual language of instruction, since the 44 state primary schools which theoretically had Hungarian as their language of instruction became Romanian in 1937-38. By then the public secondary schools were likewise exclusively Romanian, and Hungarian language sections were non-existent.

On the basis of the above, it may be concluded that the issue of education for the Hungarians under Romanian rule deteriorated year after year as a result of the Romanianization policies of the successive Romanian cabinets, and the Hungarians did not have the option of sending their children to schools where they could study in their mother tongue.

THE NATIONALITIES PROBLEM IN TRANSYLVANIA 1867-1940