Nóda Mózes

Key words:
Romania, Transylvania, inter-war period, history, Roman Catholic Church, vocational schools, legislation, Habsburg Empire
Lecturer
Faculty of Roman Catholic Theology
Babes- Bolyai University, Cluj, Romania

The Roman Catholic Denominational Education between the World Wars
previous

After the unification process of 1918, in the former Hungarian State schools Romanian language was introduced as a teaching language. Consequently, the Hungarian as a teaching language was solely preserved in the vocational schools. The governments showed little understanding toward the minorities' vocational schools, aiming rather at the unification of the scholar system. The Roman Catholic Church sustained and administrated hundreds of elementary and secondary schools, many of them having a multi-secular history. Based on the documents from the churches' archives, this study presents the efforts of the Roman Catholic Church to preserve and maintain all these schools.

Up to 1918, the institutions of the Roman Catholic Church in Transylvania had maintained a dominant position, with the overwhelming majority of the Hungarians in the Austro-Hungarian Empire members of this church. Moreover, although the separation between State and Church had been operated following the confrontations of the 1890s, the Church continued to exert its influence over society and culture, especially at the educational level. Not surprisingly, considering the overall political atmosphere inside the Monarchy, the church institutions played a tremendous role in the Transylvanian society. The state tried through all means to enlarge and expand the networks of schools under its direct control and sustenance. Nevertheless, the denominational education in the province succeeded in securing an influential and patronising position in most

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 115

activities. During the latter part of the dualist period, the state administered as little as 30% of the overall number of the primary and secondary schools in Transylvania.

As for the organisation of the system, no radical changes had occurred. The old structures of the Roman Catholic Church had been preserved. However, before the union of Transylvania with Romania, many parishes belonging to the dioceses of Satu-Mare and Oradea were included in Hungary in consequence of the new frontier lines and the subsequent application of the "aeque principaliter" principle - two dioceses governed by one bishop. The same principle had also introduced the administration of a diocese by a non-resident bishop. A similar situation could be found in the diocese of Cenad. Here, however, no change in the structure of the diocese was operated, unless we count as one the change of name from the Cenad diocese to the Timisoara diocese, prompted by the fact that between the World Wars the name used had been that of the latter.

As mentioned before, the Roman Catholic Church was one of the most important historical denominations in Transylvania, with a particular status within the social and economic relations in the region. It maintained an important school network, which in the Ciuc area was exclusive. Moreover, the Roman Catholic Church also patronised a wide range of secondary schools, all of them centuries old. In the beginning, the Roman Catholic Church took upon itself to catechise and educate the younger generation.1 These were the fundamental objectives of the activities carried out by its parishioners. The role of catechisation was to integrate the teaching and moralising strength of the Bible into the life and culture of the people. It was only logical, then, that the educational role of the church was performed by schools - the place to assimilate culture. It is precisely through this activity that the Roman Catholic Church played an important social and cultural role in the historical evolution of Transylvania.2

Following the Union of 1918, which among others granted the Romanians in Transylvania the right to self-determination, both the situation and the status of the Roman Catholic Church changed radically. The parishioners were mostly Hungarians and partly, Swabians. They too had undergone radical demographic changes. Prior to 1918, the Hungarian population was the dominant ethnicity and enjoyed the full co-operation of the state authorities, whereas after the formation of the Romanian State, they became the minority. At denominational level, the Roman Catholic Church held the dominant position in the former Hapsburg Empire, with the vast majority of the inhabitants being Roman Catholic. Then, it became just another church among a group of more within the Romanian State, functioning alongside the dominant Orthodox Church and the privileged Greek Catholic Church of the majority.3

The Roman Catholic Church examined the emerging situation and soon designed new tasks for the given conditions. Preserving and developing its network of schools and other educational institutions became a priority. This is how bishop Márton Áron underlined the responsibilities of his generation: "We have a special

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 116

duty bestowing upon us a heavy responsibility. Yet, future will give the measure of our actions and judge us by the values we have created and developed in the process of fulfilling our present mission. We are the artisans of our own destiny, and we can expect nothing from life but what we achieve through consistent, hard work. We have to discard our indolence (…) we have to exist in order to shape a generation that should meet the requirements of our times…"4

The activity in the educational field of the Roman Catholic Church and of other denominations was directly determined by the changes occurring in the social and political life of the Romanian society. Throughout the period between the World Wars, especially in the first decade, the efforts of the Romanian State were directed towards the unification of the economic, legislative and cultural spheres. The Romanian political parties envisioned different manners of accomplishing and promoting these goals. The phenomenon translated into a climate of instability in the political life of the country, the arena of confrontation for two important parties: the National Liberal Party (NLP) and the National Peasant Party (NPP). The impact was notable in the activity of the Roman Catholic Church, too. It was best illustrated in the approach to the minority problem: the NLP adopted a unifying centralising politics, whereas the NPP advocated a regional-oriented politics.

The Romanian public opinion also reflected the two parties' conflicting ideologies on the minority issue. An expert in the epoch's history and ideologies asserted
that the policy generated dissatisfactions among the minorities, even in such matters as the choice of terminology, as was the case of the term "foreigners", deemed derogative.5

From the start, the liberals had declared Romania an indivisible national state, definitely not multilingual, which, in accordance with the universal liberal doctrine, provided the equality of freedom and rights for all citizens. Therefore, the liberals considered that at the very foundation of democracy and of a full-fledged state lay the individual rather than collective rights.6 The NPP's tenet endorsed a distinct approach to the issue of minorities, but deemed it unnecessary to promote specific minority policies in Romania. Thus, the idea that there was no minority issue in Romania became a generalised viewpoint. Naturally, the apolitical Romanian society had readily embraced the idea.7

After the Union, Romania underwent a process of "building the nation", that is, the genuine process of unifying the state.8 Referring to the diverging opinions surrounding the national processes, István Bibó said: "The national frame in Eastern Europe was something to work on and rehabilitate, something to achieve and permanently defend not just against the existing dynastic state, but also against the partial popular indifference colluding with a wavering national consciousness. This situation generates the dominant feature of the unbalanced political spirituality of Central and Eastern Europe: apprehensions about the existence of the community".9 Thus, the building of a nation occurs within the frame of an existing state10, and according to Bibó's

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 117

thesis the setting up of democracy is hesitant in the East European states because of these apprehensions. As a result, nationalism is embraced by the entire society. After the unification process, the Romanian governing political forces considered that the new frame should undergo a radical, rapid and sustainable cohesion. The need for a national elite was dramatically felt, leading to an intercession by the state. Moreover, some social categories immediately enjoyed advantages that theretofore had counted as privileges for some ethnic groups. Such changes affected especially the Hungarians in Transylvania. The necessary adjustments made within the government, the state administration and the social and economic life were, eventually, reflected by the relations between the several minorities and the majority. Yet, the official politics of the state was met with sharp criticism. Traian Bratu, the dean of the University of Iasi, renowned in the World Wars period for his opinions on the status of minorities, stated that the foundation for any state was equal rights for all citizens, to be achieved only if all the citizens were loyal to the state. This goal would only be ruined by hatred or by granting privileges to some over others.11 All speciality literature dealing with the issue of nation and nationalism emphasises that education and culture are paramount in the process of building a nation. The development of the school network in order to create a new elite was sustained by the state; in fact, this was part of the cultural enterprise having for its main objective unification and the eradication of regionalism.12 This policy also affected the activity of the Roman Catholic Church. However, as pointed out by an important expert in inter-ethnic relations, nationalism has never been a major issue with the varied ethnic communities in Transylvania, contrary to what the politicians have purported.13 The legislation concerning education and the school system issued during the World Wars established the course of development for the Roman-Catholic denominational education under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church. As the schools were the most effective tools for preserving national identity, the topic ignited hot debates and led to conflicts of interest. Mikó Imre, one of the few specialists in minority law stated: "Most important among the minority rights is that regarding the schools for the citizens of ethnicity other than Romanian. In the case of the minorities, school is the agent that ensures the survival of the mother tongue and culture, and instructs the younger generations in the awareness of ethnicity. This is the source of all the problems and arguments surrounding the institutions of learning."14

On analysing the legislation pertaining to education, one can easily observe that the main laws formulate the general setting for the instruction of the minorities. By 1923, the Constitution of 1866 was still in effect, while its provisions were expanded to include Transylvania. Still, in this part of the country, the Directory Council elaborated a full set of measures and regulations. This eventually led to the enforcement of a particular variant of the law. The Constitution of 1923 made general prescriptions regarding the freedom of education, making no reference to special measures concerning the minority

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 118

educational system.15 Paragraph 24 stipulates that the right to education is provided for all the citizens of Romania by law, unless it conflicts with ethics and public order.16 Yet, the Constitution of 1938 does not safeguard unrestricted and equal access to education for the minorities. Under the royal dictatorship, all of the laws and regulations regarding the minorities were compiled into The Status of Minorities.17 Furthermore, minorities could found schools under the more general law regarding private education. The Churches could lay the foundation of private schools only by civil right.

In many respects, the Romanian legislative system, as is the case of the minority's right to education, was in consonance with the international law system. International law included the principle by which providing education in the mother tongue is the way to preserve the minority's national specificity, language and religion. This principle was also promoted by the Treaty on Minorities, signed by Romania on December 9, 1919 in Paris. The treaty safeguards the right to teach and learn in the mother tongue, as well as the setting up and administration of institutions of education and culture, and the unrestricted use of the mother tongue.18 However, the treaty did not endorse any special rights for the private schools. The state had the right to supervise and check such schools, whereas the minorities were under the obligation to administrate them. It was also the duty of the state to subsidise these schools. The treaty on minorities admitted as absolute the right to teach and learn in the mother tongue, that is, the treaty needed no further approval by the State. Traian Bratu had underlined this feature of the treaty, maintaining that to observe this legal document was mandatory for Romania to be integrated among the `civilised' states of Europe.

An international document playing an important role in the activity of the denominational education was the Concordat signed between the Romanian State and Vatican. This document came in effect in July 1929, and was paramount in settling the relations with the Holy See. It is noteworthy that the first paragraph of Article 19 stipulates that the Catholic Church has the right to found and subsidise elementary and secondary schools under the jurisdiction of a bishop, with the supervision of the Ministry of Education.19 The Concordat also stipulated that the denominational schools under the jurisdiction of a bishop had the right to choose the language of teaching. The Concordat had brought hope among the Catholics, in a country with a prevailingly orthodox population.20

1924 was the year when the first laws were issued regarding the minority education during the World Wars. The Romanian government saw the necessity for a merger of the educational system: the law regarding the public elementary education and the grammar schools. This law was paramount for the educational system. As for the minority rights, the above-mentioned law laid down the principles to follow by the laws to come.

The law extended to seven years the duration of elementary education, emphasising its compulsive character. The law was also meant to eradicate the differences

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 119

of the four distinct educational systems. The initiator of the law himself - C. Anghelescu - admitted that the goal of the law was to unify and harmonise the educational system, but also to awaken national consciousness.21 As noticed by an observer, the Romanian government officials were aware that public education was the institutional component with a dramatic impact on the fate of a nation, on its cultural and spiritual growth.22

Under the law, the teaching language was Romanian, and in the regions where the mother tongue of the inhabitants was not Romanian, the Ministry of Education set up schools in the corresponding languages. Nevertheless, Romanian language was compulsory in these institutions too. Hot debates were ignited by some provisions of the law, such as Paragraph 8, which stipulated that the Romanian citizens who did not speak Romanian were under the obligation to enrol their children in either public or private schools in the Romanian language23. This had in view the Szeklers, whom certain historians and linguists had misinterpreted as not Hungarian, but rather Hungarian-made, and who had taken up Hungarian for their mother tongue. This phenomenon led to questioning the identity of an important part of the Hungarian inhabitants. It was stated that names such as: Ráduly, Szakács, Szûcs, Kurta, Farkas were of Romanian origin.

Fiery debates were prompted by Paragraph 159, too, which stipulated that schoolteachers and other school employees coming to teach from counties outside those newly united would benefit from a 50% rise in wage. In fact, the underlying issue was the founding of the so-called cultural areas, which were decisive in the process of re-structuring the educational system in these territories.24

The coercive decision for the Hungarian community to support the state schools had also generated passionate debates, as the community had already had trouble ensuring that the activity of the denominational schools preserved their ethnic identity. The law of the private schools, which had regulated the situation of a large category of schools, did not acknowledge the specific and traditional character of the denominational schools. They were considered private schools. Despite a long series of debates and petitions submitted to the United Nations while the law of December 22, 1925 was still in draft, the representatives of the minority failed to have the denominational schools nominated and recognised under the law. Following negotiations with minister C. Anghelescu, it was agreed that under the provisions of the law the minority pupils can be enrolled in denominational schools - considered private schools - or in schools set up by private people, in addition to enrolment in state schools. The negotiations also stipulated that private schools must obtain a special license to function from the Ministry of Public Instruction. By law, these schools were under the direct guidance and supervision of the Ministry. Another stipulation that played an important role and influenced the minority education provisioned that the pupils from private schools must take their examinations in the state schools. As regards the teaching language, the law

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 120

specified it to be Romanian for the Romanian or Romanian-born children, whereas for the other ethnic communities, the teaching language was the mother tongue of those enrolled in private schools. The denominational Catholic education suffered a great loss at the hand of certain provisions of the law under which the schools supported by monastic orders and congregations must use Romanian as the teaching language, with the result that many ceased to exist altogether. Further difficulties arose when Geography and History were taught in Romanian.

Private schools did not have the authority to issue diplomas. There were cases where the Ministry conferred the authority to the private schools, with the specific provision that no denominational school could secure such status. The graduates of the Hungarian denominational schools had to pass their examination and obtain diplomas from the state schools. The law concerning private schools authorised the grammar schools set up before 1918, on condition that they observe the general norms imposed on private education25.

It is noteworthy that the law was considered a liberal and tolerant legislative initiative. This was the interpretation given especially by the Romanian press and the speciality literature. The minorities challenged the law initiated by Minister Anghelescu in what concerned the allocation of funds, the restrictions on the usage of certain books, maps, and manuscripts banned by the Ministry of Education, the interdiction to benefit from external financial assistance.

The law of school graduation passed in March 27, 1925 had both short- and long-term effects on the minority educational system in general and on the denominational one, in particular. The law specified the obligation to pass the graduation exam in the Romanian language in order to issue a state diploma or some other document testifying the graduation of the secondary school. The law caused a high incidence of school failure among the minority pupils. According to statistics, 70-80% of the candidates failed their exams in the first year.26

The legislative frame was also valid for the Hungarian Catholic education, later modified by the laws of 1928 and 1939.

The network of the Roman-Catholic schools underwent essential changes after the Great Union (1918). Following the provisions of the Peace Treaties, the state schools in Transylvania were integrated within the Romanian school system. The pupils from 1,318 state schools with Hungarian as the teaching language chose to attend the 755 Hungarian denominational schools.27 The situation would have been acceptable if the number of denominational schools had been increased. Both the Romanian legislative system and the lack of political will had hindered this process. A further factor was the refusal by most schoolteachers to take the oath as required by the Romanian authorities.

In the years following the Union of 1918, the Hungarian churches established 403 elementary schools, of which 61 Roman-Catholic, 33 public schools, 7 secondary schools, 7 commercial secondary schools, 4

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 121

pedagogic schools, and 1 pedagogic secondary school.28 This engaged an important financial effort on the part of both the Hungarian minority and the attending churches. Even the Minister of Public Instruction, C. Anghelescu, appreciated the effort. Starting with the 1919-1920 school year, the denominational schools included in their syllabus subjects which were national in character: Romanian language and literature, the Geography and History of Romania. At the time of the Directory Council, the school policy undertook to incorporate the specificity of the Transylvanian society and the history of the educational system in this part of the country, the denominational schools included.29 After the revocation of the Directory Council, this distinctive situation was ignored. In sharp contrast, the educational system was gradually centralised. The Hungarian educational system in Transylvania was subordinated to the Ministry of the Public Instruction, whose policies differed radically from those of the Directory Council. The Ministry and the authorities in Bucharest envisaged an increase in the number of public schools.

The Roman Catholic education proceeded differently during the inter-war period as compared to the pre-war period when the Roman Catholic Church held a dominant position within the state. The vast Austro-Hungarian Empire was prevailingly Catholic. Afterwards, the Roman Catholics of Great Romania became citizens of an Orthodox country with a nationally dominant Orthodox Church. This affected the denominational educational system of the other Churches in spite of the promise made by Onisifor Ghibu, the leading anti-Catholic, to safeguard the rights of the educational systems other than in the Romanian language. "There will be absolute freedom and everyone will have the right to set up as many schools as they wish".30 In January 1922, the Minister of Instruction promised that there would be no actions to repeal the Hungarian schools and the authorities would not interfere with the internal issues of these schools, for the government was fully aware of the importance of their educational system.

The measures undertaken by the government, however, were the opposite. A language certificate was required of the teachers belonging to the minorities. The Hungarian teachers did not benefit from funds allotted to teachers belonging to other educational systems. There was no retirement program for teachers at the denominational schools, and there was an interdiction to enrol pupils of nationalities other than Hungarian. The seminaries were under the obligation to use Romanian as the language of teaching. These provisions drafted by C. Anghelescu led to serious protests on the part of the non-Orthodox Church representatives, who petitioned the Minister and King Ferdinand.31

On December 24, 1923, the representatives of the minority churches held a meeting at Alba Iulia in order to promote such actions as would ensure the functioning of the denominational schools. At the proposal of Majláth Gusztáv Károly, the Roman Catholic bishop, they decided to require a hearing by the Minister. Minister Anghelescu considered the initiative belated, for all the measures taken by the Romanian State sought to secure

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 122

the learning of the official language and to hinder the process of de-nationalisation.32 Moreover, the situation of the denominational schools was aggravated by the obligation to take the degree examination in Romanian. This led to 70-80% failure.

There was much hope about an improvement in the functioning of the denominational schools, when the Liberal Government was replaced by the National Peasant Party Government. It was believed that the NPP Government under the leadership of Iuliu Maniu would try to find a solution to the problem, which, however, was left unchanged with the exception of funding.33 If we examine the figures, we will see that from 1919 to 1924, 2,289 public Hungarian educational institutions were repealed. These were elementary schools, public schools, secondary schools, pedagogical schools and commercial schools. It was estimated that after World War I there were 330,000 Hungarian children eligible for school in the United Territories, Transylvania and Banat. It was for the Hungarian churches to provide the education for these children. Over a period of some years, the churches set up 403 new elementary schools, of which 61 were Roman Catholic. The number of the Lutheran and Unitarian schools also increased when the Roman Catholic Church underwent financial difficulties.34

The following table shows the history of schools in Transylvania:

Table 1. Sponsors of elementary schools in Transylvania

Apparently, the situation of the Hungarian denominational schools was even worse than that of the Romanian

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 123

denominational schools in these provinces prior to 1914. In 1914 there was 1 Romanian school to 1,007 Romanian inhabitants, while according to the census of 1930 there was 1 denominational school to 1,647 Hungarian residents in Romania.35

From 1930 to 1931, there were 76,255 children enrolled in the denominational schools out of a total of 180,029. This represented 42.4% of the overall number. The causes were varied: families with financial difficulties, limited possibilities for the churches, or the enrolment of many Hungarian children in public Romanian schools. Romanian surveys of the period showed that in the 1927 school year there were 838 denominational schools registering 89,421 pupils: 49,841 were of Hungarian nationality and 25,978 were Roman Catholics. In 1932, 53,9% of the pupils enrolled in elementary denominational schools were Calvinists, 42,3% Roman Catholics, and 2,9% Lutherans. The decrease in number was explicable due to the waning finances of the Catholic school sponsors. The Roman Catholic Church was severely affected by the 1921 agricultural reform. Look at the following table comparing the categories of pupils and schools by counties36:

Figure 1. The number of elementary Hungarian schools in Transylvania.

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 124



Public nursery schools with Romanian as the teaching language

Elementary public schools with Romanian as the teaching language

Elementary public schools with Hungarian as the teaching language

Denominational nursery schools

In Roman Catholic schools

In Calvinist/Lutheran schools

In Unitarian schools

In Evangelic schools

Table 2. Distribution of pupils of the elementary denominational and public schools compared to the denominational affiliation of the Hungarian population.

Figure 2. The number of pupils enrolled in elementary schools in Romania 1930/31.

 

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 125

Table 3. Elementary Hungarian denominational schools in Transylvania in 1932

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 126

Table 4. Public schools with Hungarian as the teaching language (1918-1927)

27 pedagogic schools in Hungarian in Transylvania in 1918, whereas in 1928 there were as few as 8 left. In 1918, 13 out of the total number of pedagogic schools belonged to the Roman Catholic denominational education, whereas by 1928 there had remained only 5: 1 pedagogic school for boys in Miercurea- Ciuc, 1 pedagogic school for girls in Sibiu, 1 for nursery school teachers in Oradea, 1 pedagogic school for girls in Oradea, and 1 pedagogic school in Satu-Mare. The pedagogic school of Miercurea-Ciuc functioned at ªumuleu Ciuc until 1923, and was the most important educational institution qualifying teachers for the denominational schools and deacons for the Roman Catholic churches.37

The survey data for this type of schools point out that, in Transylvania, there were 4 schools qualifying Hungarian teachers, of which 2 were Roman Catholic, 1 Calvinist, and 1 Lutheran, in the 1926-1927 school year. 307 pupils were enrolled in 4 pedagogic schools for boys: 119 Catholics, 76 Calvinists, 110 Lutherans, and 2 Unitarians. There were also 9 pedagogic schools enrolling 601 girls, of which 195 were Roman Catholic. The Hungarian churches were in charge with the administration of the maintenance of the pedagogic school.38

The Public Schools were of utmost importance for the educational system as they addressed the lower middle class bourgeoisie. These schools trained the pupils in the basic scientific and practical knowledge. According to the above-mentioned data, in the 1926-1927 school year there were 9 denominational public


The tables show that the majority of the Catholic schools were located in counties such as Ciuc, Odorhei, Mures-Turda, that is, in the regions populated by Szeklers, yet there were many elementary Catholic schools which had also functioned in the Western regions of the country. The dissemination area of these schools was closely related to the dissemination of the Hungarian population, particularly to the denominational affiliation of the communities.

The secondary education was characterised by great diversity in schools and the fluctuating number of pupils. This type of instruction played an extremely important role in forming an elite, and this is precisely how the Hungarian elite had formed between the World Wars. This system had also safeguarded the national identity. According to statistical data, there were

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 127

schools, of which 2 were Roman Catholic. Most importantly, just prior to the war, public schools totalled 106, of which 46 were Roman Catholic.39

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 128

The year 1919 was a turning point in the existence of the secondary schools. This was the year in which the authorities abolished the teaching in Hungarian language in 11 of such institutions. In the school year 1926-27 there were 25 secondary schools - denominational secondary schools for boys, of which 10 were Roman Catholic. The number of pupils enrolled was 4,373, of which 2,523 were Roman Catholics. There were also 5 secondary schools - denominational secondary schools for girls, of which 4 were Roman Catholic. The number of Catholic girls enrolled was 622.40

The Hungarian commercial schools with tradition had ceased to exist. The three commercial colleges in Timisoara, Orãstie and Târnãveni were extremely important for the Roman Catholic community of Transylvania.41

The following table illustrates the situation:

Table 5. (see previous page) Centralised data on the denominational schools in 192842

As shown by our analysis, the Roman Catholic denominational education was confronted by serious problems between the World Wars. This type of education was specific for the Transylvanian region. The general impact of the process of unification and centralisation the Romanian authorities had embarked upon also affected the Roman Catholic denominational school system from a juridical, institutional and economic perspective, alike.

Notes:

Traslated by Ana-Elena Ilinca

1 See Catechezii Tradende, in Korunk hitoktatásáról , vol. II, Szent István Társulat [The Society of Saint Steven] Budapest, 1980. pp. 224, 247-249.

2 Általános Katekétikai Direktórium [General Guide on Catechization], ibidem, p.42.

3 For further discussion, see: Irina Livezeanu, Culturã si nationalism în România Mare 1918-1930, Humanitas, Bucuresti, 1998.

4 Márton Áron: Templom és iskola , in: Erdélyi iskola , VII, 1939/40, 3-4, p.126.

5Livezeanu, p. 289-347, work quoted

6 Seaton-Watson, R.W., History of the Romanians, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1934, p. 549-550.

7 See: Livezeanu. Work quoted.

8 Ibidem, p.24.

9 Bibó István, A kelet-európai kisállamok nyomorúsága , Kriterion, Bukarest-Kolozsvár, 1997, pp. 38-41.

10 Bloom, William, Personal Identity and International Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993, p. 55.

11Bratu, Traian, Politica nationalã fatã de minoritãti. Note si observatiuni, Cultura nationalã, p. 8-9.

12 Livezeanu, work quoted, pp.41-63.

13 Verdery, Katherine, Transylvanian villagers, University of California, Berkley-Los Angeles-London, 1983, p. 345.

14 Mikó Imre, Nemzetiségi jog és nemzetiségi politika, Minerva, Kolozsvár, 1944, p.427.

15 Official Gazette, nr. 282 of March the 21st 1923.

16 Ioan Scurtu, Ion Bulei, Democratia la români 1866-1938, Humanitas, Bucuresti, 1990, p.27.

17. Mikó Imre, A román kisebbségi statútum, Gloria, Kolozsvár, 1938, see: Mikó Imre.

18 Nagy Lajos, A kisebbségek alkotmányjogi helyzete Nagyromániában, Székelyudvarhely [Odorhei] 1994, p.117.

19 The Concordate in: Official Gazette, no. 126 of 1929.

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 129

20 Jakabffy Elemér, A konkordátum, in: Magyar Kisebbség VIII, 1929, p.444

21 Bratu, work quoted, p.14.

22 Jancsó Elemér, Az erdélyi magyarság életsorsa a nevelésügyek tükrében 1914-1934 , Budapest, 1935, p.13.

23 Cf. B. Kovács András, Szabályos kivétel, Kriterion, Bukarest-Kolozsvár, 1997, p.27; Popa-Lisseanu, Gheorghe: Sicules et Roumains: Un procés de dénationalisation, Socec, Bucarest, 1935., p.5; Russu I.I.: Românii si secuii, Ed. Stiintificã, Bucuresti, 1990, p.137.

24 Ghibu Onisifor: Prologomena la o educatie româneascã, Culturã româneascã, Bucuresti, 1941, p.341.

25 Nagy, work quoted, pp.135-136.

26 Balogh Júlia, Az erdélyi hatalomváltás és a magyar közoktatás 1918-1928, Püski, Budapest, 1996, p.79-80.

27 R. Szeben András, Az erdélyi magyarság népoktatásügyének statisztikai mérlege a másfél évtizedes román uralom alatt, in: Magyar Statisztikai Szemle XII, 1934, p.852.

28 Salacz Gábor, A magyar katolikus egyház a szomszédos államok uralma alatt, Aurora, München, 1975, p.66.

29 See Gheorghe Iancu, Contributia Consiliului Dirigent la consolidarea statului national unitar român (1918-1923), Dacia, Cluj, 1985.

30 Ghibu, work quoted, p.314.

31 Barabás Imre, A romániai magyar nyelvû oktatásügy elsõ tíz éve 1918-tól 1928-ig in: Magyar Kisebbség, VIII, 1929, p.79.

32 Constantin Anghelescu, Activité du ministère de l'instruction 1922-1926, Cartea româneascã, Bucuresti, 1928, p.56-58.

33 See Ioan Scurtu, Gheorghe Buzatu, Istoria românilor din secolul XX, Aideia, Bucuresti, 1999.

34 R. Szeben, work quoted, pp.885-886.

35 Ibidem, p.852.

36 The data used in the tables are drawn the works quoted and from: The Statistics on Romanian Education for the School-Years 1921/1922-1928/1929, Ministerul Instructiunii, al Cultelor si Artelor, Bucuresti, 1932, p.493-494.

37 Balogh, op.cit, p.92-93; Jancsó, op.cit, p.355-356

38 Ibidem.

39 Ibidem.

40 Ibidem.

41 Ibidem.

42 Same note 36.

JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 130

JSRI • No. 3/Winter 2002
previous