A movement with predominantly political aims took
\nshape in Wallachian principality’s western part, Oltenia, in January 1821. The
\nhead of the movement was Tudor Vladimirescu. He was a former military in the
\nRussian army who had become a merchant. In his undertaking, Vladimirescu was
\ninfluenced by the Enlightenment nationalist ideas of his time. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Tudor Vladimirescu led a 5,000-strong group or armed
\nmen and reached Bucharest in March. There he tried to render the ideas of his
\ntime more coherent. For nearly two months running, Vladimirescu ruled
\nWallachia. However, in May 1821, he fled Wallachia, because of a prospective
\nTurkish invasion. On May 21, 1821, Tudor Vladimirescu was assassinated by the
\nGreek nationalists, who accused him of treason. That movement, which took shape
\n200 ago, has for long been described as the beginning of the Romanian national
\nemancipation process.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
However, the geo-political situation in the Balkans was
\na little bit more complicated. Greek nationalism, in hot pursuit for the
\nindependence of Greece, fuelled the revolutionary society Eteria (the
\nBrotherhood). Russia offered a strong support to the Greek nationalism, which
\nalso enjoyed the support coming from the Romanian Principalitiesthrough their
\nPhanariot ruling princes. We recall the Phanariotes were of Greek origin. They
\nhailed from Constantinople’s FAnar district and had been appointed by the
\nOttoman Porte at the helm of Wallachia and Moldavia beginning 1716. Small
\nwonder then that the 18th century in its entirety has been dubbed the Phanariote
\ncentury. It was perceived in a negative way, by contemporaries as well as by
\nposterity. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The allegedly common Romanian-Greek project, in 1821
\nwould turn into two separate projects, the Greek project and the Romanian
\nproject. Each or of the two projects were to be carried through in different
\nways.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Historian Alin Ciupala accompanied us in our bid to
\nretrace the history of the movement headed by Tudor Vladimirescu 200 years ago.
\nOur attempt was to view the events of the past in a contemporary perspective. Alin
\nCiupala was keen on emphasizing the essential contribution of the patriot
\nboyars to the launching of the insurrection. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Alin Ciupala:<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
There is an element which was
\ngenerally ignored and which was deliberately omitted by the communist regime,
\nnamely the role the national high-ranking class of boyars played in that. This
\nclass was under the influence of the Enlightenment ideas originating in the
\nWest and reaching the Balkans through the Greek culture. In effect, these ideas,
\nwhich part of the Romanian high-ranking boyars embraced, caused the breakup we
\nnoticed especially in the second half of the 18th century’s later
\npart. Actually, there is the breakup between the Greek national project and
\nwhat was about to become the Romanian national project. In other words, the
\nGreek nationalism which the Phanariot ruling princes and Greek boyars
\npatronized in the Principalities went at loggerheads with the nationalism of a
\nsizeable part of Romanian high-ranking class of boyars. Which prompted the
\nRomanian class of boyars to find solutions to remove the Phanariotes from
\npower.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Greeks stood to gain from this movement, the
\nRomanians stood to gain from that as well, but in a different way. The Greeks
\nwere in control of the political, administrative and military means in
\nWallachia, while the Romanians were in control of the economic ones. According
\nto Alin Ciupal\u0103, Tudor Vladimirescu was the solution found by the Romanian
\nclass of boyars, a solution that was not envisaged by them, notwithstanding. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Alin Ciupala:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
It is against such a backdrop that Tudor
\nVladimirescu made his presence felt. He was a man of action, a man with a
\nmilitary experience, he fought in the Russian-Ottoman war of 1806-1812, he was
\neven granted medals by the Russian military authorities. He was hired by the
\npatriot boyars, he was called to Bucharest, he was entrusted with certain sums
\nof money, and his mission was to go to Oltenia to organize, arm and lead the
\npandurs, a light infantry corps he belonged to, all the way back to Bucharest. It’s
\njust that Vladimirescu would take the whole undertaking on his own once he got
\nto Oltenia, since he saw himself with so much authority on his hands and with
\nso many people looking up to him, so he managed to muster a 5,000-strong army
\ncorps or thereabouts. He would depart himself from the high-ranking boyars’
\nproject and head for Bucharest with the ever clearer intention of filling the
\npower vacuum that occurred in the wake of the death of Wallachia’s last
\nPhanariot ruling prince.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
But what, in terms of interest, united
\nthe high-ranking boyars and Tudor Vladimirescu ?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Alin Ciupala: <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The
\nhigh-ranking boyars and Tudor Vladimirescu did have a point in common, namely
\ncasting the Phanariotes out. The collaboration relationship saw its breakpoint
\nthe moment Tudor Vladimirescu took the action on his own, completely. When that
\nhappened, the high-ranking Romanian boyars would flee to Brasov and Sibiu,
\nwhere they found protection, while Vladimirescu found himself all alone, trying
\nto impose his own authority. We have lots of documents revealing his constant
\neffort to obtain the support of the boyars who remained in the country, since
\nthe boyars were the only ones to give him the legitimacy he needed to hold a
\nposition of authority. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
T<\/p>\n
he Greek national movement awaited Russia’s great support.
\nSuch a support was never offered by Russia and Vladimirescu’s pandurs army
\ncorps splintered from the Greek army. The situation became unclear and the
\nOttoman troops set things to rights. Was the
\nwhole undertaking a failure?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Alin Ciupala:<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
These events and the Greek revolution
\noverlapped, and the moment the Ottoman Empire was assured, via diplomatic
\nchannels, that Russia would not interfere for the support of the Greek
\nrevolution, the Ottoman military intervention was launched. Interesting to note
\nthat clashes between the Ottoman troops and Tudor Vladmidrescu’s pandurs army
\ncorps never happened, which is a clear sign of the fact that the aim of the
\nOttoman intervention was to quash the Greek revolution. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Tudor Vladimirescu’s tragic end and the events rushing
\nforward had nonetheless a positive effect on posterity. The Romanian elites
\nwould return on the throne of the Romanian Principalities, while the national
\nstrategy they thought out for the future would be more articulate.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Revolution and betrayal in the Romanian Principalities in the 19th century<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":50395,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41141],"tags":[42892,42894,42893,29661,32916],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-131256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-history-show","tag-eteria","tag-ottomans","tag-pandurs","tag-revolution","tag-strategy"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n