Nation-Building and Contested Identities: Romanian & Hungarian ...

The Idea of Independent RomanianNational Economy in Transylvaniaat the Turn of the 20 th CenturyBARNA ÁBRAHÁMThis paper deals with the modernization process of the Romanians ofTransylvania at the turn of the 20 th century. It addresses the process ofsocial stratification, focusing on certain regions marked by more favorableconditions for economic and social development. My aim is to give a briefaccount of the economic and cultural activity of the young Romanian middleclass, seeking to stabilize its positions, widen its social base, and, eventually,striving to construct an independent ethnic-based Romanian “nationaleconomy” in Transylvania. 1During the period under consideration (the half century after theCompromise of 1867), the Romanian population of Transylvania hada markedly less industrial character than the Hungarian and Saxon populationsin terms of its occupational structure. In 1900, more than 86% of theRomanians attained a living by “primary production” (wage-earners anddependents), while a mere 6.4% earned their living in mining, metallurgy,industry, commerce, finances and transport. 2 Only 1.4% worked in civil andchurch service or in liberal professions (at the same time, among the Magyarsthis stratum made up almost 5%, while among the Saxons only a bitless). This means that if one is to identify a process of embourgeoismentamong Romanians, one must look at the peasantry. 3Naturally, it is the backwardness and the misery of the peasantry thatis generally reflected in the works of the contemporary observers, but onecan hear some other voices as well. As the famous economist MihailManoilescu stated: “In the Old Kingdom peasants were too down, whileboyars too high to assimilate the bourgeois mentality and way of life.On the other hand, in Transylvania, the rich peasantry and the connectedprofessionals have created a favorable milieu for bourgeois virtues.” 4This milieu can be localized mainly in the territory of Königboden(Királyföld/Pãmîntul Crãiesc), 5 with the flourishing villages near Hermannstadt(Nagyszeben/Sibiu). 6 The most famous settlement, Sãliºtea(Szelistye) was considered a model for Romanian embourgeoisment bothin a Hungarian sociological questionnaire 7 and in a Romanian touristguidebook. In the narration of the latter, the richness of this tiny, purely209