834707837

5 The “Phanariots" in Romanian Textbooks 45

The Phanariots ruined the old institutions, brought the Romanian Principalities under a morę opressive Ottoman domination and "mollified" Romanians’ way of life, characterised during the reign of local rulers by strength, uncorrupted morał values, military skill and courage. A. T. Lau-rian deplores “the mollification and the demoralization of the Romanians" ²⁴, and, according to V. A. Urechia, the Phanariots “estranged the Romanians from fighting” ²⁵. Rot only the army, but also Romanian schools and łan-guage were persecuted: “The Romanian language from churches, schools, chancellery and even from the houses of the boyards had been driven away and replaced by the Greek language" (łon Vasiliu) ²⁸.

The last element that contributes to shape the image of Phanariots in textbooks is the permanent antithesis "Phanariots" — "local princes" {national Princes). The former are considered directly responsible for the xemoval of the latter.

The persistence and the maintenance of the clichć are due also to the conrey from one textbook to another or to the influence which an important textbook has over the others. The presence of the Phanariotic epoch in text-books differs in extent and level of systematisation. A great number of schoolbooks dwell upon the whole epoch without naming the rulers or the important events. On one extreme side is M. C. Florentiu who specifies: ■“I thought it is of no use and interest to mention in the text of these Ro-tions for the elementary school children all leaders of that cruel time" ²⁷. Also, A. D. Xenopol says: “All rulers from that time are much alike one to others and they did not do anything else but plunder and spoił the country. So I will only name them without telling especially about them, this question being of no interest" ²⁸. But the same Florentiu presented in 1873, in his textbook, pages including the most important rulers, as A. T. Lau-rian in his own textbook, rending a most minutely focusing on a great number of rulers.

The denying on the whole brought to the labeling of the Phanariots as a collective character (all rulers were the same, so they did not deserve to be named).

Rot only the period of the Phanariots is set forth without distinction, but also it bas clearly less place in textbooks than the warrior national rulers or than the founding heroes (Decebal and especially Trajan).

4. But the situation is not so linear.

As for the setting forth of the epoch in his wholeness, certain textbooks authors seem not to follow this tendency. The epoch starts for V. A. Urechia long time before the 18th century ⁸⁹. Also M. C. Florentiu, morę or less explicitly, is conscious of the fact that the epoch starts earlier: “When

²⁴ A. T. Laurian, Elemente de istorie fi biografii pentru classa IV a scolelor primart din Moldova_t Ia$i, 1857, p. 141.

²⁶    V. A. Urechia, op. cit., p. 49—54.

²⁰ łon Vasiiiu, Curs de istoria romdnilor pentru usul clasei a Ill-a primard urband fi rurald de ambele sexe, Barlad, 1894, p. 31 — 32.

²⁷ M. C. Florentiu, Nofiuni de istoria romdnilor, Bucureęti, 1874, p. 99.

²⁸ A. D. Xenopol, Istoria Romdnilor pentru ciaście primare de ambe sexe, Bucureęti, 1879, p. 88.

²⁹    V. A. Urechia, op. cit., p. 49 — 54.