<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The
\nRevolution led by Tudor Vladimirescu was held in the first part of the year
\n1821, actually over February and May. It led up to the end of the Phanariot
\nreigns in Wallachia and Moldavia. Its leader, later on, gained the status of a
\nmythical character, thanks to the revolution he led. Tudor Vladmirescu is
\noftentimes mentioned in history textbooks; he has been immortalized through
\nstatues and paintings. However, the real character is less well-known by the
\nlay public, at once being an interesting, even controversial character. The
\nRevolution led by Tudor Vladimirescu in Wallachia was intertwined with the
\nGreek revolution of liberation from the Ottoman Empire. Vladimirescu’s
\nconnection to the Eteria, the secret society that actually started the Greek
\nrevolution, eventually led to his assassination. Born into a family of freeholders, mosneni,
\nin Romanian, in Gorj County, through his skill and adaptation capacity, Tudor
\nVladmirescu gained the status of an estate agent; in turn, he was a merchant
\nand a purveyor of the Tsarist army, a rank similar to that of officer, a rank he
\ngained during the Russian occupation of 1806 and 1812. The reasons underlying
\nthe outbreak of the unrest also included personal ambitions as well as the need
\nof several political changes. His activity depended on the collaboration with
\nthe Eteria, but also on the hope of a military assistance provided by the Russians, which,
\neven though it had not been promised, it was also expected by the Greeks. The
\nhistorian Tudor Dinu, in his recently launched work titled The Greek
\nrevolution of 1821 on the territory of Moldavia and Wallachia, provided a
\ndetailed account of the personality of Vladimirescu and of the underlying
\nreason of his collaboration with the Eteria revolutionaries led by Alexandru Ypsilanti. Also, the book highlights the purpose for which Tudor Vladimirescu
\nstarted his revolt. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Here is the historian Tudor Dinu himself, with details on
\nall that.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Tudor played a key part in the Eteria fighters’ plans. As early as 1820,
\nwhen the Eteria revolutionary warriors convened in the town of Ismail to set up
\nthe general plan of the revolution, they said that in Wallachia, the revolution
\nwas to be started by a one Tudor Vladmirescu, whom they deemed as the
\ncommander of the armed men in Craiova.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The
\nEteria revolutionaries sponsored Tudor Vladimirescu and thought he could be a
\nmanageable tool in their hands. But they couldn’t have been more wrong, just as
\nthe great boyars got it all wrong, who wanted to wind him round their little
\nfinger. He could be, in my opinion, the most impressive example of a self-made
\nman in our history: a commoner, who believed in his star, trying to overcome
\nhis condition in a brilliant manner, going at all lengths for his career, first
\nworming himself into the boyars’ favor, then going into trading very
\nsuccessfully, first, on behalf of this and that boyar, later, for himself,
\ngetting a position in administration, all that culminating with a military
\ncareer. Gaining acceptance to the Russian consul’s entourage, collaborating
\nwith the Eteria, he went as far as hoping to obtain the reign in a new system,
\nhe even hoped for the toppling of the social order in the Principalities, which
\ncould have been made possible though the liberation brought by the Russians.
\nThe Greek sources provide many new things, in this respect, stating that the
\nEteria revolutionaries promised Tudor they would get him seated on Decebalus’ s
\nthrone. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
However,
\nirrespective of the reasons, Tudor Vladimirescu and his army succeeded to
\ndestabilize the Phanariot order, also gaining the support of a relevant part of
\nthe domestic boyars’ class, reaching as far as the princely court in Bucharest.
\nMeanwhile, the Eteria revolutionary warriors led by Alexandru Ypsilanti had
\npenetrated Moldavia. There they were trying to muster an army made of locals,
\nhoping the population in the Romanian principalities would rise up, on a large
\nscale, against the Ottomans. Part from the political changes did the
\nrevolutionaries consider social changes as well? <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Historian Tudor Dinu:<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The most radical, to that effect, socially but also
\npolitically, was Alexandru Ypsilanti. In his political program, Alexandru
\nYpsilanti stipulated, for instance, the existence of indigenous rulers, but
\nalso some sort of constitutional monarchy, with the rulers’ incomes being
\nchecked by an early parliament of the Romanian Principalities. As for Tudor, he
\nalso had important proposal in the social field meant to improve the lives of
\ncommoners, yet they were not as radical as they were presented to us. For instance,
\nhe proposed, among other things, that certain taxes be reintroduced. It goes
\nwithout saying he also had some very interesting suggestions. The most
\nimportant one, for the development of commerce, was the dismantling of domestic
\ncustoms, by means of which products brought from another city were very
\nexpensive. Also, Tudor proposed the equal decrease in revenues for bakers and
\nbutchers, so that bread, but also meat, could be affordable. There also was
\nanother proposal, perhaps the most radical one, but impossible to implement:
\nthe merit-based ascription of high-office dignities, something that could not
\nbe implemented, and as for the system of corruption, it could not disappear,
\ngiven that Tudor himself pleaded for the income reduction in the case of
\nhigh-office dignitaries.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Despite
\nthe long-term intentions, the situation on the ground was not a happy one. The
\nEteria Army’s crossing of the Romanian territories wreaked havoc and meant
\nplundering and unrest carried by the local population. Moreover, the looming Ottoman
\ninvasion ran the risk of yet again turning the Principalities into a war
\ntheater, what with the fact that the eagerly-awaited Russian assistance failed
\nto appear. Under the circumstances, Tudor Vladimirescu initiated a risky
\ndiplomatic action, meant to protect the country, but also his past success; he
\ntried to negotiate with the Sublime Porte in Istanbul. However, Alexandru Ypsilanti
\nlearned about those attempts and considered Tudor a traitor. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Historian
\nTudor Dinu:<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Maybe the most important
\naccusation count is a letter Tudor sent and which fell into the Sultan’s hands.
\nIn that letter he expressed his wish to wage war against Ypsilanti the
\ntraitor, provided the High Porte gave him some assistance. But that was not
\npossible. The High Porte could not offer military assistance to a mutinous
\nChristian. It may very well be that Tudor was extremely clever, in his bid to
\nmaintain good relations with the Turks, refraining from going against
\nYpsilanti. Also, Tudor kept a last-ditch hope alive that the Russian army might
\ncome. He
\nhad been given assurance, via numerous channels, that is why he was slowing things
\ndown a little bit. But from the viewpoint of the Eteria revolutionaries, that
\nwas treason. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Accused
\nof treason, Tudor Vladimirescu stood trial according to Eteria’s Criminal Code.
\nHe was sentenced on the grounds that he went against Eteria’s motherland,
\nGreece, even though Tudor’s motherland was definitely Wallachia. That is why
\nhis trial and subsequent execution are, even to this day, rated as inequities,
\nby the Romanian historical research and public opinion. For the Romanian Principalities,
\nthe revolution would come to an end once with Tudor Vladimirescu’s death on May
\n28, 1821. As for the Eteria revolutionaries, they would continue their fight
\nagainst the Ottomans on the territory of Wallachia, until their defeat in
\nDragasani in early June. Here is historian Tudor Dinu once again, this time
\nspeaking about the effects of the 1821 revolutionary year on Wallachia and
\nMoldavia. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Tudor Dinu:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
For the Romanian Principalities, the Greek revolution was catastrophic, because, in the wake of the
\nGreek revolution, the Romanian principalities were completely devastated. The
\nRomanians’ sacrifice was an exemplary one. One or two decades were needed for
\nthe Romanian Principalities to recover from such a devastation. Then a
\nRussian-Turkish war followed. In another move, the role the 1821 Revolution
\nplayed was fundamental, since it marked the Romanian principalities
\ndefinitively falling within the West’s orbit, even though the process had begun
\nin 1812. It took shape and was to be completed at the level of the elites, and
\nnot at the level of the Romanian peasant, who, in the 19th century,
\nstill lived according to ancestral rhythms. Such a sacrifice was necessary, so that Romania could find its place on
\nthe map pf Europe, and not on that of the Ottoman Empire. (EN)<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The 1821 Revolution led by Tudor Vladimirescu<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":136,"featured_media":123226,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[45210],"tags":[40590,31842,42066,30162,29661],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-170072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-rri-encyclopaedia","tag-aftermath","tag-army","tag-defeat","tag-reform","tag-revolution"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n