Southeast Europe

however, and the Romanians managed to hold onto a large number of schools (mainly
primary schools) in which Romanian patriotism was nurtured (Livezeanu, 1995:144).
In order to obtain more than a primary education, Romanian youths, the majority of
them being rural dwellers, were forced to leave their villages and attend Hungarian or
German schools in towns. In these schools teachers had to both educate them and turn
them into loyal Magyars. Encouraging them to abandon their language and traditional
dress was the way this was acheived. This made it more difficult for them to pursue any
symbolic resistance (Livezeanu, 1995:145).
Hungarian cultural institutions prior to 1918 were extremely difficult for the nonassimilated
to permeate, and few Romanians progressed successfully without losing
their Romanian identity. Hungarians tended to inhabit urban areas while the Romanians
were relegated to a poorer, rural existence. In 1910, 72.7% of the urban population of
Transylvania was Hungarian, while the Romanians who lived in urban areas were either
“ghettoised” or Hungarianised (Livezeanu, 1995:153).
By the time the region became part of Romania in 1918, therefore, it was immensely
Hungarian in character. The Romanian administration had trouble with both east and
west Transylvania, the former being largely inhabited by Szeklers and the latter by
Magyars. The Szeklers had a history of privilege there, and as they dominated the whole
area, it was extremely difficult to impose the policies of romanianization. The Magyars
were most numerous in the Hungarian border area and caused similar problems.
Although the Romanians tended to differentiate between the Szeklers and the Magyars,
they viewed the Magyars with more hostility (Livezeanu, 1995:138).
All the subsequent regime changes shaped the identity of the Hungarians in Romania.
Hungarians in Romania had to redefine their position, strategy, and consequently their
national identity according to the changing context. The essential turning point was in
1918 when Transylvania was annexed to Romania. Before 1918 Hungarians belonged to
a privileged nation, but then they became a national minority. Hungarians organised
ethnic-based organisations, and their principal goal was to preserve their identity and to
sustain their institutional framework. Hungarian national identity was defined in
opposition to the Romanian national identity.
As mentioned in Section 6.1, even under communism the Hungarian language and
culture did not suffer seriously until the 1956 uprising in Budapest, which caused a
nervous reaction within the Romanian government. The uprising, initiated by students
and fought largely by civilians, was brutally suppressed by the Russians who fired
indiscriminately into the crowds. Many students and civilians died. Hungarians in
Romania displayed a level of solidarity with those fighting the Soviets in Budapest,
which alarmed the communist regime. In the eyes of the latter, a minority population
who identified so closely with those who had started a bloody insurrection needed to be
eliminated (Gallagher, 1995:55-56). Following this, the regime began to pursue the
policy of assimilation. This reached its height under Ceauşescu who spoke publicly of
equal rights for all Romanian citizens and then made it impossible for them to enjoy
those rights. Members of the Hungarian minority fought for their right to use their
mother tongue (see Section 1.3) in a country where dissent was uncommon.
In its attempt to ethnically homogenise the inhabitants the communist regime adopted a
policy of population transfers and appointed Romanian officials in regions inhabited by
Hungarians (Illyés, 1982). The policy of assimilation can be observed if we look at the
25