Jump to content

Traian Herseni

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Traian Herseni
Born(1907-02-18)February 18, 1907
Iași,Brassó County,Austria-Hungary
DiedJuly 17, 1980(1980-07-17)(aged 73)
Bucharest,Socialist Republic of Romania
NationalityRomanian
Other names
  • Traian Hariton
  • Trajan Herseni
Scientific career
Fields
Institutions

Traian Herseni(February 18, 1907 – July 17, 1980) was aRomaniansocial scientist, journalist, and political figure. First noted as a favorite disciple ofDimitrie Gusti,he helped establish the Romanian school ofrural sociologyin the 1920s and early 1930s, and took part ininterdisciplinarystudy groups and field trips. A prolific essayist and researcher, he studied isolated human groups across the country, trying to define relations between sociology,ethnography,andcultural anthropology,with an underlying interest in sociologicalepistemology.He was particularly interested in the peasant cultures andpastoral societyof theFăgăraș Mountains.Competing withAnton Golopențiafor the role of Gusti's leading disciple, Herseni emerged as the winner in 1937; from 1932, he also held a teaching position at theUniversity of Bucharest.

Herseni became a committedeugenicistandracial scientist,who discarded a moderate left-wing stance to embracefascism,and parted ways with Gusti over his support for theIron Guard.He was nevertheless protected during the anti-Guard backlash of 1938, when Gusti made him a clerk within the Social Service, part of theNational Renaissance Frontapparatus. A leading functionary and ideologue of the fascistNational Legionary State,and a figure of cultural and political importance under dictatorIon Antonescu,he proposed thecompulsory sterilizationof "inferior races", and wrote praises ofNazi racial policy.Indicted by thecommunist regimein 1951, he spent four years in prison. He made a slow return to favors as a researcher for theRomanian Academy,participating in the resumption of sociological research, as well as experimenting insocial psychologyand pioneeringindustrial sociology.

Formally a partisan ofMarxism-Leninismafter 1956, Herseni was more genuinely committed tonational communism.The national communist policies instituted during the late 1960s allowed him to revisit some of his controversial theses about the ancestral roots ofRomanian culture.At various intervals, the regime appropriated his radical ideas on ethnicity, including some criticized as racist. Herseni's final works dealt withethnology,national psychology,thesociology of literature,andsociological theoryin general. In the 1970s, he also produced a body of works interpretingRomanian folklore,in which he emphasized the connections withIndo-EuropeanandPaleo-Balkan mythology.

Biography

[edit]

Origins and schooling

[edit]

Herseni was a native ofTransylvania,which, for most of his childhood, was anAustro-Hungarianprovince. His home village wasIași (Jás),in what was thenBrassó County(present-dayBrașov County), where his father worked as a notary public. On his paternal side, Herseni originated from nearbyHârseni,which apparently gave the family its name;[1]several families of that name exist throughout the area, suggesting that theanthroponymprecedes the geographical location—one theory, advanced by historianAugustin Bunea,is that all Hersenis originate with anIstro-Romanianclan, itself dubbed "Hersenicus".[2]By the time of his death, the sociologist was recorded as a member of theRoman Catholiccommunity.[3]Born on February 18, 1907, Herseni went to school in Iași (1912–1915) andFăgăraș(1915–1924),[4]graduating in 1924 from theRadu Negru High School.[5]These years coincided with World War I and the recognition ofTransylvania's union with Romania:Herseni began his secondary education in a Hungarian-speaking regimen,[6]and passed hisbaccalaureate examinationin 1924, as a Romanian national.[4]At the time, he was president of the students' literary club, named in honor of poetGeorge Coșbuc.[7]

From 1924, Herseni was a student at theUniversity of BucharestFaculty of Law, studying under Gusti,Constantin Rădulescu-Motru,Nicolae Iorga,Ovid Densusianu,andVasile Pârvan.[4][8]Passionate about Gusti's attempts to restructure Romanian social science around rural sociology andparticipant observation,Herseni was taken on board for Gusti's field trips toNereju(1927) andFundu Moldovei(1928). Another one of Gusti's students,Henri H. Stahl,first met and befriended him at Nereju, and was impressed by the encounter. Herseni, he writes, "appeared quiet, withdrawn; and yet not lonesome", "ready to take on whoever would oppose him, whether friend or rival". He grasped complex social issues with "rapidity", and "imposed himself as one of the team leaders, obtaining for himself a rank that he would never lose".[9]Herseni was particularly involved in a project to collect data on "pastoral sociology", whileStanciu Stoianobserved village schools andXenia Costa-Forupioneered studies in thesociology of the family.[10]

Herseni passed his final examination in 1928, having specialized in sociology, psychology, andpedagogy,and presenting a paper on social relations as observed in Fundu Moldovei.[11]This qualified him to teach sociology at theGheorghe Lazăr National College,where he worked for the following school year.[12]In 1929, he went toGermanyfor more specialization. He enlisted at theFrederick William (Humboldt) University,where he heard lectures byWerner Sombart,Eduard Spranger,Richard Thurnwald,andAlfred Vierkandt.[11]He published an overview of German sociology in Gusti'sArhiva pentru Știință și Reformă Socială,praising it as a "lively and freely-moving science", and as a good model for sociology in "the less advanced countries".[13]

Herseni returned toBucharestin 1930, did his obligatory service in theRomanian Land Forces,then took part in expeditions, organized by Gusti's Romanian Social Institute (ISR), toDrăguș,Runcu,andCornova.[11]Drăguș, a center of the ethnographic region known asȚara Oltului,was selected on his insistence, being located in close proximity to his native village.[14]At Cornova, Herseni focused on the social hierarchies and segregated clans of aBessarabiancommunity.[15]He spent some time researching on his own at asheepcotein theFăgăraș Mountains,publishing his results inBoabe de grâureview.[16]He also began contributing to theClujmagazineSocietatea de Mâine,with articles that inventoried and examined the various kinds ofsocial distance.[17]

As Gusti's aide

[edit]
Herseni (seated, center, facing the viewer), withDimitrie Gusti,Henri H. Stahl,Xenia Costa-Foruand other sociological team leaders.Drăguș,1931

In 1932, Herseni married a university and ISR colleague, Paula Gusty. She was the daughter ofPaul Gusty,a famous theater director[18](the similarity in surnames makes it likely, but not certain, that she was related to Gusti himself).[19]Also that year, having lectured for a while atSabin Manuilă's School of Social Work,[6]Herseni was appointed by Gusti's an assistant professor in the University of Bucharest department of sociology, ethics and politics. Stahl claims to have been Gusti's first choice, but to have declined the position in order to suit Herseni, who, as a married man, needed a steady flow of income.[20]As a result, Herseni was slightly better off financially than other intellectuals of his generation.[21]

Herseni also followed Stahl's political options: he sympathized with the left-wing cell within theNational Peasants' Party,and, in 1933, contributed to center-left reviews such asZaharia Stancu'sAziand Stahl's ownStânga.[22][23]He declared himself a partisan of "social democracy"andclass collaboration,"not a Marxist, and not a communist, but nevertheless a man of the left".[24]An article he published inGând Românescin early 1933 shows him as adeistandChristian existentialist,who argued that theÜbermenschwhere those Christians who could attain astate of grace.The rest of the populace, Herseni argued, "are forever non-human."[25]Emil Cioran,a philosopher of that generation, described Herseni as "passionate" about "Heidegger's existential philosophy ", with a" metaphysical sensibility "that was the mark of" true Transylvanian intellectuals, as if to compensate for the petty bourgeois spirit of middle-of-the-road intellectuals ".[26]

In 1933, shortly after theNazi seizure of power,Herseni visitedBerlin,befriending there the anti-Nazi RomanianPetre Pandrea.[27]He took hisPh.D.in 1934, with the dissertation paperRealitatea socială( "Social Reality" ), an "essay in regionalonthology".It earned praise from Gusti, who called Herseni" one of the most gifted and educated [youths] of today's generation ", one promising to" enrich Romanian sociology and philosophy with very valuable works. "[4]Stahl recalls that only Herseni could match his teacher's "surprisingly vast erudition" and "systematization" of received knowledge; he was also among the more loyal of Gusti's gifted disciples, effectively replacingPetre Andrei,who had spoken out against the ISR.[28]Herseni was an enthusiastic promoter of sociological campaigns, famous as the ISR's "polygraph"and as Gusti's most orthodox interpreter.[29]

According to Stahl, Herseni intended to both popularize sociology and give it "philosophical depth", treating the two tasks as equally important.[30]Taking aneo-Kantianapproach to science, Herseni believed that a soundphenomenologicalinquiry needed to clarify the position and limits ofsocial constructionism,or, as Stahl puts it, to find out "whether there is a 'social' reality, as distinct from 'natural' and 'spiritual' realities."[31]Moreover, Herseni explored the challenges of sociologicalepistemologyand the methodology of participant observation. He believed that objectivity could only be attained with self-imposed limitations and a laborious, preferably collective andinterdisciplinary,research program.[32]Herseni declared in 1934 that he followedErnst Kantorowicz,who had defined sociology as, above all, an experimental science.[33]Also that year, he spoke out in support of Cioran andConstantin Noica'ssubjectivism,positing that philosophy needed to be understood as inherently separate from science.[34]

Largely "empirical",Herseni and Stahl's sociology nevertheless took its distance from the"transcendentalist"approach of social scientists such asMircea Vulcănescu,with whom they first clashed in Fundu Moldovei.[35]By 1938, their highly localizedqualitativeapproach was conceding ground to aquantitative"zonal" tactic, which was favored by Gusti andAnton Golopenția.[36]Herseni adopted a tactic of publishing his work in stages, from raw studies inSocietatea de Mâineto monographic series, and finally to synthetic volumes and brochures. One such work was printed at Gusti's expense, asMonografia sociologică; rostul, metoda și problemele ei( "The Sociological Monograph; Its Purpose, Method and Issues" ), then reissued in 1934 asTeoria monografiei sociologice( "The Theory of Sociological Monographs" ), to be used as a standard ISR manual.[37]Gusti also backed Herseni's candidature as chair of theUniversity of Clujsociology department, vacated afterVirgil Bărbat's death. The project failed when local academics elected one of their own, Constantin Sudețeanu, and prompted a much-publicized scandal.[38]

Fascist dissent

[edit]
Logo of the Social Service, featuringCarol II'sroyal cypher

Unlike Gusti, Herseni shied away from public speaking,[39]but was one of the ISR speakers at the 12th Congress of theInternational Institute of Sociology(IIS), held in Brussels in August 1935.[40]He continued to publish his sociological sketches in various magazines and newspapers. In addition toSocietatea de Mâine,Gând Românesc,and the ISR'sArhiva pentru Știință și Reformă SocialăandSociologie Românească,these includeFamilia,Tribuna,Revista Fundațiilor Regale,Independența Economică,andSemne.[39]Herseni was also a social-science columnist forViața Românească,added to the editorial team byMihai Ralea,the left-wing sociologist.[41]Falling more in line with theSocietatea de Mâinegroup, and influenced by physicianIuliu Moldovan,Herseni became a visible supporter ofeugenicsandbiopolitics,introducing eugenicist language to works he wrote alongside Gusti.[42]This interest soon veered intoscientific racismandfascism,possibly inspired to Herseni by another eugenicist,Iordache Făcăoaru;[43]like Făcăoaru, Herseni viewedantisemitismas natural and beneficent, eventually affiliating with the radically fascistIron Guard.[44]In 1944, Herseni described his joining of the Guard as a conscious rebellion against the establishment, prompted by his losing the (supposedly rigged) competition at Cluj.[45]He was, according to cultural historianLucian Boia,one of the more notorious Iron Guard figures among the university staff, in line withP. P. Panaitescu,Radu Meitani,Vladimir Dumitrescu,andRadu Gyr.[46]

Their extremist position was conspicuous enough that the more centrist Moldovan felt obliged to distance himself from both his disciples.[47]By 1935, Herseni had also come to sympathize with a fascist dissidence which divided the Gustian movement: although attacked byErnest BerneainRânduialamagazine, which spoke for this counter-current, he parted ways with Stahl over political stances.[48]At the time, moderate left-wingers such as Stahl and Golopenția, witnessing the internecine conflicts between the Guardist supporters and the radical-left group headed byGheorghe Vlădescu-Răcoasa,began equating Herseni's politics with an egotistic social climbing.[23]Herseni's Iron Guard affiliation also ruined his relationship with Gusti: he abandoned his editorial office at the ISR's magazine,Sociologie Românească,to be replaced by Golopenția, who was now Gusti's most treasured companion.[49]Herseni also lost his post of assistant professor at the university,[6]moving closer to the regional sociological school ofBukovina,which was headed by GuardistTraian Brăileanu,becoming a regular contributor to Brăileanu's journalÎnsemnări Sociologice.[50]Together with his wife, who was acting as his secretary and unsigned co-author,[8]he returned to Țara Oltului to study the youth "posses" (cetele de feciori).[51]

Herseni's split from the Bucharest school was not definitive: in 1935, together with Gusti, he wrote the sociology textbook for high school seniors.[52]The next year, he participated in the ethnographic expedition toȘanț,alongside Gusti, Stoian,Constantin Brăiloiu,Lena Constante,Jacques Lassaigne,Jozsef Venczel,andHarry Brauner,[53]and contributed to a special homage issue ofArhiva,where he honored Gusti's "sociological, ethical and political system".[54]He and Gusti also published, atCartea Românească,Elemente de sociologie cu aplicări la cunoașterea țării și a neamului nostru( "Elements of Sociology as Applied to the Study of Our Country and Our Nation" ), ageopoliticaltract. It was partly inspired by, and partly opposed to, the theories ofFriedrich Ratzel,and was highly skeptical of bothgeographicalandbiological determinism.[55]

Herseni was able to outmaneuver his rival Golopenția, who was largely absent from the country during that interval. When he returned, Herseni offered a "truce", which included ceding Golopenția some of his classes at university.[56]In 1937, Gusti included Herseni on his team for the IIS Congress, which was held in tandem withParis Expo.He lectured there on the "social equilibrium of the Romanian village".[57]Herseni alternated such work with political writing. Also in 1937, he wrote a propaganda tract for the Iron Guard and the workers' movement, which was confiscated by the authorities upon publication.[58]The text was a polemic with theCommunist Party,which Herseni described as having a "Jewish doctrine",whereas the Guard genuinely represented workers. As noted by historian Adrian Cioflâncă, Herseni's credo had" great similarities with communist discourse ", endorsing nationalization, a minimum wage, and social insurance, and a" work-based hierarchy "throughout society.[59]

From 1938, democracy was suspended in Romania, andKingCarol II,an enemy of the Iron Guard, took charge of political and social affairs, ending democratic rule. The Iron Guard was repressed, with its leader,Corneliu Zelea Codreanu,being seized and made to stand trial. In May 1938, Harseni appeared as one of Codreanu's 27 defense witnesses.[60]Gusti was co-opted into Carol's dictatorial project, and assigned to lead the Social Service, which, as Stahl notes, was a positive venue for social improvement, but also a potential "tool" for Carol's authoritarianism.[61]Despite his Guard affiliation and his approval of thedeath squads,for which he was denounced by Stancu inAzi,[62]Herseni was spared scrutiny, and probably never detained.[63]Resuming his work at the university, he evaluatedJewishstudents such as Theodor Magder. According to Magder, Herseni showed himself to be "very demanding, but also very fair", in that he did not discriminate on an ethnic basis.[64]

Drafting Herseni into the Social Service,[65]Gusti assigned him to teach a specialized course in rural sociology at the Bucharest sociology department, making him a referent and director of research at the ISR.[66]There was also a rapprochement between Gusti and Brăileanu, which Herseni himself mediated.[67]During July 1938, Herseni, Stahl and Vlădescu-Răcoasa where in Paris, attending the IIS 13th Congress, which voted to hold its next session in Bucharest.[68]He also directed rural sociology campaigns in Țara Oltului, publishing his findings as a series of volumes. These were set to mark the IIS congress, which was ultimately canceled by World War II.[69]He published fragments from hishistory of sociologycourses in various installments between 1938 and 1941 as well as a manual on the drawing ofsociograms.[70]

National Legionary doctrinaire

[edit]

Carol formalized the single-party state in December 1938, establishing a "National Renaissance Front".In January 1939, by signing a letter drafted by Gusti, Herseni, Golopenția and Stahl were welcomed into this new group (other signatories includedAl. Lascarov-MoldovanuandVictor Ion Popa).[71]In January 1940, Herseni was still affiliated with the Carlist regime, overseeing the creation of a state-sponsored National Students' Front;[72]at the time, his wife was working as a schoolteacher inPetru Rareș,south of Bucharest.[73]The looming threat of war and Romania's rapprochement withNazi Germanysent the Gusti school into its final crisis: in summer 1940, Stahl was drafted and sent to work on the "futile" task of building up defenses; Herseni helped him obtain his Ph.D., intervening with the university leadership.[74]This was just before the downfall of the National Renaissance Front, brought on by theSecond Vienna Award,which saw Romania cedingNorthern TransylvaniatoHungary.In the political chaos that followed, Gusti became a political suspect, and Carol ordered his own Social Service to be shut down bySiguranțapolicemen.[74]ThePrime Ministerof the time,Constantin Argetoianu,later referred to the Service as a "bad memory".[75]

This article is part ofa serieson the
Eugenics Movement
Historical trajectory
Pre-war academic proponents
Post-war academic remnants
Pamphlets and manifestos
Organizations
Without significant post-war activity

With significant post-war activity

Related

On September 6, 1940, the Iron Guard took power in Romania, proclaiming theNational Legionary State,with GeneralIon Antonescuas theConducător.Herseni, emerging as a "major propagandist"[76]and "prominent legionary ideologue",[77]saluted the takeover in his articles for the Guardist paperCuvântul.In December 1940, he paid homage to the Legionary Commandant,Horia Sima,without whom "the Movement would become an amorphous mass". In order to succeed, Sima was to be obeyed "with unbounded devotion."[78]Herseni also contributed to thepersonality cultsurrounding Sima's predecessor, Codreanu, who had been assassinated by Carol; Herseni called him a "national prophet" of the "imperial ways", for whose arrival "our people have been praying for two thousand years".[79]Codreanu's "spirit", Herseni claimed, "leads the nation to victory."[80]He argued that Codreanu's sacrifice guaranteed "the redemption of the Romanians", but warned that "hundreds and thousands of years have prepared his birth, other hundreds and thousands of years will be necessary for the accomplishment of his commandments".[81]Despite his radical metaphors, Herseni's ideological texts toned down Codreanu's stance on the peasant issue, reinterpreting it as aself-helpguideline rather than as a revolutionary agenda forland reform.[82]

Cuvântulalso hosted Herseni's articles on the merger of eugenics and racism, for "the betterment of the human race". He declared that Romanians were, at core, part of the "Nordic race",which accounted for" the most noble Romanian cultural productions ", but that" the race lost its purity ".[83]Herseni suggested a "racial purification", and a formal policy ofracial segregationas "a question of life and death".[84]Crediting "the genius ofAdolf Hitler"as in inspiration, he proposed thecompulsory sterilizationof "inferior races", specifically the Jews,RomaniesandGreeks,"as a tribute to beauty, to morality, and in general to perfection."[85]"The decline of the Romanian people", Herseni claimed, "owes itself to the infiltration in our ethnic group of inferior racial elements interbreeding with the blood of [our] ancestors".[86]HistorianRadu Ioanidsees these musings as samples of "a typically fascist mentality", in which "the incitement to crime clothes itself in fanciful language."[87]According to scholarMaria Bucur,theracial legislationintroduced at the time suggests "some links" to Herseni and Făcăoaru's "aggressively restrictive positions";[88]Făcăoaru is known to have had a more direct involvement in this program.[89]Scholar M. Benjamin Thorne also notes that, among Iron Guard figures, Herseni and Liviu Stan stood out for theirRomaphobia;their identification of the Romanies as racial enemies had no precedent in Guardist discourse.[90]

Herseni was chosen for high office in the new bureaucracy, serving as Secretary General of a combinedMinistry of EducationandCulture,seconding Minister Brăileanu.[91]He countersigned an order by Antonescu and Brăileanu for the demotion and arrest ofPetre Andrei,the previous Minister of Education, who was thus shamed into committing suicide.[92]Herseni soon found himself drawn into the conflict between Sima and Antonescu, over the appointment of Guard loyalists at theAccademia di Romania(Antonescu wanted the old regime figures to be kept in place).[93]By the close of 1940, Herseni and Făcăoaru were co-opted by Rector Panaitescu on the university review commission, whose mission was to purge academia of undesirables in general, and in particular of former National Renaissance Front dignitaries. Herseni was thus a participant in the decisions to expel or demote a number of scholars: Ralea, historianConstantin C. Giurescu,philologistGeorge Călinescu,and classicistAlexandru Rosetti.[94]The same commission also looked into cases of low-ranking staff members, suspect for being Jewish or associating with Jews: it expelledGeorge Emil Paladefor his "links with the Jews" and "immoral behavior", and nearly demotedTudor Vianu,on grounds that "kikes cannot educate the Romanian youth".[95]Credited with having intervened in Vianu's favor,[96]Herseni recused himself from the case against Gusti, noting that he owed him his career in academia.[97]

The Antonescu years

[edit]

Ralea was arrested by the authorities during November 1940,[98]and possibly slated for an extrajudicial killing by he Guard, but (according to his own testimony) Herseni intervened and rescued his life.[99]According to his friend Pandrea, Herseni himself was eventually sidelined by the National Legionary regime, after being denounced by lecturerSorin Pavel—who had married Herseni's sister.[100]In January 1941, the Guard and Antonescu went to war with each other, in what was termed the "Legionary Rebellion";Antonescu emerged victorious. Herseni, now perceived as a" moderate "[97]or "decent"[75]Guardist, was able to escape the subsequent purge, and made his peace with the new military regime. Reportedly, he resumed his contacts with Ralea, assuring him that Sima, by then disgraced and in exile, had tried to curb his own party's violence.[75]In May of that year,Revista de Studii Sociologice și Muncitoreștihosted Herseni's homage piece to the economistVirgil Madgearu,who had been murdered by the Guard a year before.[101]A year later,Sociologie Româneascăpublished Herseni's posthumous tribute to Andrei, referring to his "great stature" and "untimely death".[102]

He resumed his scientific contribution with a treatise on the sociology ofpastoralism(Tratat de sociologie pastorală), sponsored by theRomanian Academy,[103]which was in some part a polemical study offolkloristics.Herseni condemned folklorists for working "at random", and asserted that ethnography in general needed to submit itself to the sociological method.[104]He also contributed a chapter on Romanian sociology, including a sketch on himself, to a history ofRomanian philosophy,put out in 1941 byNicolae Bagdasar.He justified his own inclusion by noting that "our [Herseni's] sociological activity has been recorded, through not always praised, by the country's greatest sociologists and a few foreign ones".[105]Herseni also sketched there the results of his epistemological inquiries: society was an objective inner reality, "the sense of anus",leading to the emergence of a" social community "that was therefore not biological, but spiritual. On this basis, Herseni read society as both a" spiritually objective "reality and astructural-functionalone, and thus as an autonomous object of science.[106]

Since June 1941, Romania had joinedNazi Germanyin itsinvasion of the Soviet Union.From January 1942, Herseni was behind the lines on theEastern Front,in the newly occupiedTransnistria Governorate.Reportedly, his mission was to set up schools for theRomanian communities.[41][77][107]He was also mandated by GovernorGheorghe Alexianuto carry out a large ethnographic project, recording Romanian Transnistrian customs. The endeavor, which also involved Golopenția andNichita Smochină,resulted in ethnographic collections by Gheorghe Pavelescu and C. A. Ionescu, with prefaces by Herseni himself.[108]Resigning from the ISR that same year, Herseni moved toSibiuto teach "national sociology" at the University of Cluj.[109]The latter had been evacuated fromits namesake city,in Northern Transylvania. As a eugenicist, Herseni also presided over a department of "sanitary sociology"at Sibiu's Hygiene and Public Health Institute.[4]He was also interested in what he termed "administrative sociology". The official journal ofInternal Affairscarried his topical essay, in which Herseni also called for a purely Romanian style of governance.[110]

During July–August 1944, Herseni organized another survey of folk traditions in southern Transnistria, having set up a research institute withinOdessa University.[111]In early 1944, during theSoviet offensive in Transnistria,Herseni was spotted inBerezovca County,on an official mission to destroy records of themass killings of Jews.[112]In September 1944, after thecoup which toppled Antonescuand introduced aSoviet occupation,he was altogether suspended from academia.[34]He was arrested by theSiguranțaduring a round-up, but in December he was among the 107 Guardists paroled and allowed to visit their families. The fact became known to the communist press, and prompted theSănătescu governmentto arrest those responsible, including Colonel Manolescu.[113]Herseni's ethnographic research immediately became taboo: the study he wrote with Ionescu was printed at Sibiu in December 1944, but simply as a collection of genericcolinde.All detail permitting localization in Transnistria was stricken out by the censors.[114]

Imprisonment, marginalization, recovery

[edit]

Herseni's name was published on a list of 65 former dignitaries indicted by theRădescu governmentas responsible for "bringing disaster upon the country". He was subsequently re-arrested on January 29, 1945, but released a while after.[115]Expelled from his Cluj University chair in July 1945,[116]he managed to publish one more brochure, with Editura Clujana of Bucharest:Originile sociologiei( "The Origins of Sociology" ).[70]Herseni's sister died of cancer that same year, leaving Herseni's nephews with almost no means to support themselves.[100]Herseni himself was reportedly still working at the Hygiene and Public Health Institute in early 1946. This caught the eye of aNational Liberalminister,Mihail Romaniceanu,who asked his colleagues to explain why a "prominent Guardist" was still eligible for such offices, whereas lesser ones were being purged.[117]

Again arrested on May 4, 1951,[115]Herseni was tried for his role in the National Legionary administration,[118]with Vianu showing up to defend him as a character witness.[119]Sentenced to four years in prison, he did time inJilavaandAiudpenitentiaries, before being released on September 29, 1955.[115]He still remained under aninterdiction to publishand was entirely marginalized in society,[120]turning toghostwritingfor more politically suitable scholars.[121]His old political enemy, Ralea, decided to include Herseni on his research team at the Romanian Academy's new Psychology Institute from 1956.[41]Securitatesources report that he was the person actually in charge of that foundation, since Ralea would only appear there for a couple of hours per week.[122]Herseni was officially only a regional director, and had a similar office at the Anthropological Center (both 1958).[123]He was undergoing a slowrehabilitation,possibly facilitated by Communist Party activistMiron Constantinescu.A former Gustian, turnedMarxist-Leninistdoctrinaire, Constantinescu had assigned himself the task of selectively reconsidering "reactionary" sociology.[124]Constantinescu maintained contacts with Herseni, Stahl, Vlădescu-Răcoasa andTeodor Bugnariu,and prepared himself for the revival of the sociological school, with inputs fromMarxist sociology.[125]

By 1958, Herseni was in correspondence withG. T. Kirileanu,a former librarian of the royal court, who was asking him to look after books he had donated to the Academy. As argued by historian Constantin Prangati, this also made him part of a clandestine intellectual network which "supported national culture, defending the Romanians' language and history, while maintaining faith in the arrival of better times"; other members were Giurescu,Iorgu Iordan,Simion Mehedinți,andDan Simonescu.[126]Organizing research trips inHunedoara Region,atClopotiva,Herseni published essays on family sociology andgenealogyin a 1958 collection edited byȘtefan Milcu.He produced a thesis according to which Romanians of that area were "always the overwhelming majority", having effortlesslyRomanianizedtheir Hungarian neighbors since the 1600s. As noted in 2014 by ethnologist Marin Constantin, Herseni's approach to the topic evidenced a throwback to the Gusti sociological narrative, beingRomanian-centeredand "self-referential".[127]Historian of medicineMarius Turdawrites that Romanian communist social science was folding back on racial science, a "national biology involving notions of racial differentiation, cycles of growth and decay, genetic genealogies, the interconnectedness of nurture and nature". The changing political climate allowed anthropologists "to reposition autochthonous ideas within their discipline"; Herseni, "an important Legionary sociologist", "provides an exemplary case of post-war re-adaptation, professionally and theoretically."[128]

Bucur similarly argues that Herseni stands as a prime example of an "openly racist" eugenicist whom the communist regime was able to recover for its own propaganda purposes.[129]Turda traces the links between the fascist ideologist and the communist anthropologist: "Although the general topic Herseni reflected on was genetic genealogies, his main argument focused on the importance of ethnic anthropology in connecting forms of the nation's micro and macro physical development over time."[130]The same continuity is noted by historians Alexandru Sonoc and Alexandru Grișcan, who view Herseni's description of the Romanian ethnos as a "somatic type" as "doubtlessly racist".[131]Herseni thus intended to return to his 1940 research and find a way to republish its early results (the papers were by then stored at theBrukenthal National Museumin Sibiu).[39]In 1961, he contributed to Milcu's monograph on the rural society ofBătrâna,focusing on its peculiar inheritance andelderly carepractices.[132]His work in the field also resulted in a historical anthropology essay, which rediscovered the pioneering work ofPavel Vasici-Ungureanu.[133]

Ralea, who had been fully integrated among the post-war Marxists, also co-opted Herseni for projects insocial psychology.Reportedly, Ralea excused Herseni by arguing that he had only joined the Guard in hopes of being rewarded withtenure.[134]At the time, the mainline communists put on hold their project to uproot sociology as a bourgeois science: "a significant thaw occurred".[135]Together, Ralea and Herseni published a 1962 tract,Sociologia succesului( "The Sociology of Success" ), for which Herseni used the pseudonymTraian Hariton.[41][136]This praise of collectivism and economic incentives under thesocialist mode of productionwas reviewed with skepticism by the Romanian exile psychologist Edgar Krau, who notes that Ralea and "Hariton" had failed to even mention "the all-pervading [communist] party tuition" as a possible disturbance of data.[137]Locally, the book was famous for including a reference to sociology in its very title, the first such work to be allowed under communism; this was one of several "surprising signs of political openness and of sociology's acceptance."[138]Ralea and Herseni also heralded a departure from the more intransigent anti-American propaganda of the 1950s, reintegrating some positive references to American sociology.[41]

Return to prominence

[edit]
Thedrilling rigofBoldești-Scăeniin 1959

Shortly after making his return to publishing, Herseni was set to be reactivated as a political writer, at the regime's behest. In early 1963, the propaganda magazineGlasul Patrieiwas scheduled to reemerge as a venue for reformed andreeducatedIron Guardists; Herseni was reportedly assigned to work on an essay calledO eroare fundamentală: concepția legionară despre muncitorime și țărănime( "A Fundamental Error: The Legionary Take on Workers and Peasants" ).[139]The same magazine ultimately featured his regular contributions by 1966.[140]Like Ralea and Stahl, Herseni was becoming a noted supporter of thenational communist,anti-Soviet, party line, promoted officially by the old party leadership from 1964, and subsequently taken up by the new General Secretary,Nicolae Ceaușescu.[141]

Herseni also involved himself in debates about the future of sociology, defending the science against criticism, and arguing that sociologists could answer specific problems that could not be addressed by statisticians or economists.[142]While gaining leverage with Ralea, he had lost backing from Constantinescu, who perceived him as a personal rival and, possibly, as a superior thinker, and worked to keep him away from sociological research.[143]Herseni worked instead with Bugnariu, with whom he co-authored an essay on the history of Gustian sociology, which appeared inContemporanulin October 1964.[138]After 1965, when he entered a new period of prolific writing,[144]Herseni sought to accumulate direct knowledge in the field ofindustrial sociology,reviving and adapting Gusti's (and his own) interwar methodology: a monographic "problem-centered" technique, and a focus on interdisciplinarity.[145]As noted by historian Valentin Săndulescu, he thus wanted to show himself useful to a "potentially valuable" project, that of organizing socialist enterprises.[146]

In a 1968 piece, literary critic Radu Negru proposed that: "One should not fully discount sociologists such as Dimitrie Gusti or Traian Herseni for their deformed political temptations [of the interwar]".[147]As Bucur notes, Herseni was by then in a position where he himself generated "the new Marxist-Leninist normative discourse".[129]In 1967,Familiapublished his article expressing affinities with the Marxist doctrinaireAthanase Joja;the piece also stated that he had always held quasi-Marxist opinions.[148]Such claims were disputed in the official Marxist journal,Lupta de Clasă,by A. Crișan, who noted: "Traian Herseni has the merit of having made great progress these past years, when it comes to assuming a scientific position in philosophy and sociology. However, when it comes to comparing his views of 1934 with the Marxist worldview, matters should be clearly separated."[149]Four years later, Herseni was arguing that Gusti's sociological school had represented a "collective reaction of our progressive intellectuals against fascist infiltration". This verdict too was disputed by Nicolae S. Dumitru, who noted that it had no grounding in fact; he rates the school as "bourgeois" with "some Marxist tendencies", but not truly anti-fascist.[150]

In 1968, Herseni was allowed to travel abroad, to Paris. There, he reunited withEmil Cioran,but failed to meet withEugène Ionesco,as transport had been disrupted bystrikes and student riots.[151]Back at the institute, he compiled thelife historiesof 550 industry workers, documenting their departure from an "axial" family and their contact with modernity.[152]Herseni's work in social psychology resulted in a definitive treatise,Psihologie socială,co-authored with Ralea and published in 1966, shortly after Ralea's death.[153]In 1967,Contemporanulhosted Herseni's essay about the old-regime politicianSpiru Haret,highlighting his contribution toprogressive educationand his conflict with "the ruling classes".[154]As a columnist and sociological analyst inFamilia,he chronicled books byPierre Francastel,Herbert Read,Jean Piaget,Talcott Parsons,andT. R. Fyvel,as well as reintroducing his public to works by Gusti,Virgil Bărbat,Alexandru Claudian,andȘtefan Zeletin.[155]

He later set himself a study case ofindustrializationinBoldești-Scăeni,where, as Stahl recounts, "adrilling righad been set up, radically transforming the local, rural, social landscape, spurring modernizing social processes ".[145]The result was a study in "concrete social psychology", the 1969Industrializare și urbanizare,[145]which, according to sociologist Irina Tomescu-Dubrow, samples the "valuable work" produced inurban sociologyunder communism.[156]Additionally, the team documented decades of migration patterns, using a census, a set of questionnaires, and tools borrowed fromhistorical demography.[157]Also in 1969, Herseni issuedPsihosociologia organizării întreprinderilor industriale( "The Psycho-sociology of Organization in Industrial Units" ), atEditura Academiei,andLaboratorul uzinal de psihologie, sociologie și pedagogie( "The Industrial Laboratory of Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy" ), atEditura Științifică.[158]

Also in 1969, the same company issued Herseni's companion tosociological theory,Prolegomene la teoria sociologică.Reviewing the work forSocial Research,Jiří Kolaja sensed "a very skillful adaptation of certain Marxist lines of thought though [Herseni] appears not to be a Marxist." As noted by Kolaja,Prolegomeneattempted to mediate betweenindividualist,structuralist,andphenomenological sociology.[159]In 1970, Herseni spoke about his sociological and political convictions in an interview withTribuna.He defined himself as a committed communist, and made predictions about thecommunist future:"in communism, people will be less wicked than we are at present, because they shall have fewer rationales for being wicked."[160]The interview was covered forRadio Free EuropebyMonica Lovinescu,the anticommunist literary critic. She noted that Herseni, with his "degraded mystical" terminology, no longer distinguished between "sociology" and "ideology".[161]However, according to scholarDaniel Chirot,who visited Romania during that interval, Herseni confessed to him in private:

I used to write things praising 'The Captain' and now I write pretty much the same thing, but praising Ceaușescu. I'm not a Marxist, you understand, but I have to admit that I like what he's doing.[76]

Sociologist of literature

[edit]

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, Herseni diversified his contribution, with a chapter in the pastoralist sociology treatise of Franz Ronneberger and Gerhardt Teich (1971) and an essay introducing the work of psychologistNicolae Vaschide(1975).[70]Other tracts were focused on defining and applying theories from thesociology of literatureto a Romanian context. In the mid-1960s, his message (paraphrased by film critic Andrei Strihan) was that: "Under capitalism [...], an owner is enslaved by his assets, he does not advance as a human, but as an owner, he never enriches his own personality, but accomplishes himself only through external things. [...] Socialism replaces the wealth-based principle (to hold) with the existence-based principle (to be)."[162]Herseni sketched out the project in aLuceafărulissue of 1968, welcomed there as a return to professional contributions by Ralea and Călinescu.[163]Coordinating a work calledPsihologia culturii de masă( "The Psychology of Mass Culture" ), which appeared the following year, Herseni set out to explain the terms of art, and described the "effects of mass culture" among Romanians.[164]

AtEditura Univers,[163][165]Herseni publishedSociologia literaturii. Cîteva puncte de reper( "Literary Sociology. A Few Pointers", 1973), andLiteratură și civilizație( "Literature and Civilization", 1976). Despite being infused with concepts borrowed fromErich Auerbach,his contribution focused mainly on the relationship between societies and the literature they produced, and as such viewed itself as fundamentally different fromcomparative literature.Herseni made explicit references to "national psychology",linguistic determinism,and national "rhythms" of creativity, referencing the anthropological theories ofWilhelm Wundt,Franz Boas,George Murdock,andEdward Sapir.[166]He argued that structuralism was a relevant paradigm for the study of culture, but only if subsumed to "national specificity".[167]Overall, Herseni theorized that art and literature were collective in nature, originating from "imitation" (ormimesis) rather thansublimation.[168]Inspired byLucien Lévy-Bruhl,Constantin Noica,Mircea Eliade,Ruth Benedict,andJames George Frazer,Herseni described language and early poetry as interconnected withfolk religion,and especially with magic.[169]The works also contained methodological proposals for the research of reading habits, with a typology borrowed fromAndré Maurois.[170]

As noted in 2008 by scholarEugen Negrici,such writings are also intertwined with the official dogmas of national communism: "still haunted by his old fears, [Herseni] tried to look his best in front of the communist authorities, providing his sociological perspective—one saturated with Marxist cliches—on Romanian literature".[121]By contrast, sociologist Florența Stăvărache argues that Herseni introduced "fissures" in official dogma with his "critical note on how literary doctrines and ideologies were all dealt with through the lens of 'Marxism-Leninism'."[171]Also according to Stăvărache, Herseni's musings about the "social responsibility of writers" and the possibility of their "constrained political engagement" were "evidently alluding to his contemporaries".[172]She criticizes Herseni's abundant use of "erudite" referencing, noting that it made the work outdated: working from inside a "captive society", Herseni had had access to Lévy-Bruhl, but not to his critics.[173]

Herseni took his pension from the Psychology Institute in 1973,[123]but carried on with his work in sociology and anthropology. His studies of industrial sociology were bound together asPsihologia colectivelor de muncă( "The Psychology of Working Collectives", Editura Academiei, 1973) and an eponymous textbook:Sociologia industrială(Editura Didactică și Pedagogică,1974). According to Stahl, this was both a "world-level work" and a monograph of "our country's real issues", "the result of direct experiences".[145]Herseni's original drafts were "apolitical", treatingindustrial relationsas indistinct from socialist to capitalist countries, and were revised by censors to comply with the party line.[174]Also in 1974, Herseni contributed to an Editura Științifică collection on industrial-sociological laboratories, with a study ofsocial engineeringtechniques.[175]The following year, returning to his native region, he contributed to a monograph on the Făgăraș Chemical Plant.[175]

Final years

[edit]

During the early 1970s, in essays he wrote for Constantinescu'sSociologia Militansarchive, Herseni explained his intention of transcending rural sociology, applying its lessons to understanding (or generating)social actionsin the national sphere, and, beyond, ingeopolitics.[176]In 1976, he completed his "paleoethnographic" study about the "posses" of Țara Oltului, published byEditura DaciaasForme străvechi de cultură poporană românească( "Ancient Forms of Romanian Folk Culture" ). As noted by Stahl, it evidenced "an essential change in his preoccupations", bringing with it Herseni's formal inclusion in the community of Romanian folklorists.[145]The book series also signified a break with the Gustian tradition of strict sociology, turning tocultural anthropology,which the young Herseni had criticized repeatedly. Commenting on this conversion, Stahl concluded that Herseni remained "an enigma".[177]

Forme străvechiclaimed to show that the posses were "a vestige of ancientGeto-Dacianbeliefs and practices, which still preserve somepre-Indo-European elements."[178]TakingRomanian onomasticsas his point of departure, Herseni argued that Romanians conserved a belief in theTellus Materand reincarnation within the family.[179]Parts of the work recorded thelocalization of Christmas,including the "dilution" ofan older pagan holiday,[180]or posited that, in the folk psyche, theVirgin Maryhad replacedBendis;[181]in the ancient balladMiorița,he identified an opposition betweenpatriarchyandmatriarchy,as embodied, respectively, by the Sun and Moon.[182]He also reviewed and categorized 400colindeof Țara Oltului, noting that 88 of them had Christian "non-canonical" content, and another 124 where entirely non- or pre-Christian.[183]Some of Herseni's views on the matter remain particularly controversial. According to Negrici, the book shows Herseni as a convert toprotochronism,the communist doctrine (blended with "the undigested residues of the interwar right" )[121]which supposed Romanian cultural superiority and ancient pedigree. Herseni "endorses the thesis that Romanian civilization, albeit rural and oral, is by no means inferior to the literate civilizations that were cultivated in citadels and towns."[121]Another topic of criticism was Herseni's claim to have discovered an unknown statute of the posses, byIon Codru-Drăgușanu,which had in fact been studied decades earlier.[184]

Herseni died in Bucharest[115]in July 1980. On July 19, he was buried in the Catholic section ofBellu Cemetery.[3]News of this reached Cioran in September, leaving him distraught at the loss of his friend of youth.[34]His last published works include a French-language essay on theDacian Draco,in which he argued thatdragonsorzmeiwere among the "primordial beings" of local mythology.[185]According to Paula Gusty-Herseni, his lifetime output comprised 541 works of social science, of which 29 were volumes (although, Stahl cautions, their content often overlapped);[39]Achim Mihu, who republished some of Herseni's works, counts 543.[186]One of his final contributions was the historical studyCultura psihologică românească( "Romanian Psychological Culture" ), which sought to establish a link between an ancient national psychology and the development of psychology as a modern science.[187]Additionally, Herseni contributed a chapter inRomulus Vulcănescu's introduction toethnology,a specialized field which Herseni wanted to delimit from both anthropology and sociology as "the science of folk phenomena".[188]He also leftTeoria generală a vieții sociale omenești( "The General Theory of Human Social Life" ), a manuscript comprising 1,276 pages, read by Stahl as a final synthesis "of his work in the realm of sociology".[189]Its mission statement described a merger of Gustian and Marxist ideas, around the "objective laws of social development".[70]

Also in 1980, Herseni's essay on the "Romanian race" saw print asCultura psihologică românească( "Romanian Psychological Culture" );[131]Teoria generalăwas also eventually published in 1982.[171]Herseni was more fully recovered and discussed after theRomanian Revolution of 1989,which lifted the ban placed by communism over most of his work.[190]Herseni's work in Transnistria was only revisited in 1994, when C. A. Ionescu's book was printed, in its complete form, inChișinău,Moldova.[114]However, as noted in 2003 by scholar Ionel Necula, he was still not properly appreciated by the intellectual community. As Necula assessed in retrospect, Herseni's work under communism was no more embarrassing than similar contributions by Noica,Lucian Blaga,orPetru Comarnescu— "what [they] wrote under communism is what they would have written under any other regime."[34]

More controversially, Herseni's work was also reclaimed byneo-fascistpublications which appeared throughout the 1990s.[191]AnthropologistZoltán Rostáshad by then contacted various of his colleagues, including Paula Gusty-Herseni, publishing his interviews with them in various volumes, including the 2003Sala luminoasă( "A Lit Room" ).[40]She died aged 98.[8]The Hersenis had one daughter, Ioana, a psychologist at theOil & Gas University.[8]In 2007, she and Marian Diaconu issued his sociological overview,Istoria sociologiei românești( "History of Romanian Sociology" ).[8][192]Marking Herseni's centenary that same year, the ChișinăuAcademy of Economic Studieshosted a symposium in his honor.[8]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 698, 700; (1981), p. 118
  2. ^C. Stan,Școala poporană din Făgaraș și depe Târnave. Volumul 1: Făgărașul,p. 278. Sibiu: Tiparul Institutului de Arte Grafice Dacia Traiană, 1928
  3. ^ab"Decese", inRomânia Liberă,July 18, 1980, p. 4
  4. ^abcdeStahl (1980), p. 698
  5. ^"Absolvenți – Promoția 1924".www.radunegru.ro(in Romanian).Radu Negru National College.RetrievedAugust 16,2024.
  6. ^abcNastasă, p. 407
  7. ^Rap., "Din Făgăraș. Societatea de lectură 'V. Coșbuc' — Alegerile sinodale", inPatria,May 10, 1924, p. 10
  8. ^abcdef(in Romanian)Ludmila Doroșencu,"Podurile de flori mai sunt trecătoare",inBiblio Polis,Vol. 24, Issue 4, 2007
  9. ^Stahl (1980), p. 700
  10. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 52–53
  11. ^abcStahl (1980), pp. 698, 700
  12. ^Nastasă, p. 407; Stahl (1980), p. 698
  13. ^Nastasă, pp. 199–200
  14. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 118, 129
  15. ^Iordan Datcu, "Cornova 1931", inPhilologia,Vol. LVI, Issue 1–2, 2014, p. 163; Herseni, p. 585; Stahl (1981), p. 160
  16. ^Herseni, pp. 585–586
  17. ^Cornelia Rada, "Structurile latente ale distanței sociale", inRevista Calitatea Vieții,Issue 1/2011, pp. 66–67, 81
  18. ^Stahl (1980), p. 701; (1981), p. 184
  19. ^(in Romanian)Traian D. Lazăr,"Paul Gusty despre Caragiale",inApostrof,Issue 1/2013
  20. ^Stahl, p. 184
  21. ^Boia, p. 34
  22. ^Boia, pp. 41–42; Ornea (1995), p. 175
  23. ^ab(in Romanian)Zoltán Rostás,"Fermentul unei generații. Corespondența lui Anton Golopenția",inRevista 22,Issue 1060, June 2010
  24. ^Ornea (1995), p. 175
  25. ^Crina Poenariu, "An Outline of the Ideological Premises of a Prophetical Literary Discourse in the Literary JournalGând Românesc",in Iulian Boldea (ed.),Studies on Literature, Discourse and Multicultural Dialogue. The Proceedings of the International Conference Literature, Discourse and Multicultural Dialogue,Vol. I. Arhipelag XXI Press, Târgu-Mureș, 2013,ISBN978-606-93590-3-7,p. 79
  26. ^Emil Cioran,"Recuperare publicistică (III)", inCaiete Critice,Issue 10/2010, p. 25
  27. ^Bogdan Mihai Dascălu, "Un valah orgolios: Petre Pandrea", inCaiete Critice,Issues 3–4–5/2008, pp. 59–60
  28. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 699–700
  29. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 698, 700; (1981), pp. 140–141
  30. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 698–699
  31. ^Stahl (1980), p. 699
  32. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 699, 701, 702
  33. ^Crișan, p. 127
  34. ^abcdIonel Necula, "Reverberații. O generație cu destin de Port-Royal sălbatic", inContemporanul,Vol. XIV, Issue 5–8, February 2003, p. 55
  35. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 101–102, 140–141, 220, 292
  36. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 359–361, 388, 390
  37. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 701, 703; (1981), p. 140. See also Bulgaru, p. 75; Herseni, p. 584
  38. ^Nastasă, pp. 404–406; Stahl (1980), p. 701
  39. ^abcdStahl (1980), p. 701
  40. ^abBulgaru, p. 18
  41. ^abcdeCamelia Zavarache, "Geometria unei relații complexe: elite, modele ale modernizării statale și regimuri politice în România secolului XX", in Cristian Vasile (ed.),"Ne trebuie oameni!". Elite intelectuale și transformări istorice în România modernă și contemporană,Nicolae Iorga Institute of History& Editura Cetatea de Scaun, Târgoviște, 2017,ISBN978-606-537-385-3,p. 255
  42. ^Bucur, p. 153
  43. ^Lucian T. Butaru,Rasism românesc. Componenta rasială a discursului antisemit din România, până la Al Doilea Război Mondial.EFES, Cluj-Napoca, 2010,ISBN978-606-526-051-1,pp. 234–235
  44. ^Bucur, pp. 44, 89, 113
  45. ^Clark, p. 144
  46. ^Boia, pp. 103–104
  47. ^Bucur, p. 89
  48. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 219–221
  49. ^(in Romanian)Z. Ornea,"Corespondența lui Anton Golopenția",inRomânia Literară,Issue 45/2000
  50. ^Vintilă, p. 530
  51. ^Rostás & Văcărescu, p. 361
  52. ^"Incepe școala! O nouă programă analitică, — noui manuale", inRealitatea Ilustrată,Issue 449, August 1935, p. 24
  53. ^Stahl (1981), p. 335
  54. ^Bulgaru, p. 86. See also Herseni, p. 530
  55. ^Didă, pp. 43–45, 55
  56. ^Cosmin Ionuț Patca, "A Different Perspective on the Gusti School. About the Evolution of Personal and Professional Relationships between Dimitrie Gusti and Anton Golopenția", inAnalele Universității din Oradea. Fascicula Sociologie–Filosofie–Asistență Socială,Vol. 14, 2015, pp. 26, 28, 30
  57. ^Golopenția, p. 150
  58. ^Clark, p. 157
  59. ^(in Romanian)Adrian Cioflâncă,"Masacrul antisemit de la. Muncitorii și radicalizarea Mișcării legionare (IV)",inRevista 22,Issue 1405, February–March 2017
  60. ^"Procesul lui Corneliu Codreanu a început azi dimineață — Desbaterile au loc în fața unor săli arhipline. Ele sunt stenografiate. Toți reprezentanții presei străine și din Capitală sunt de față la proces", inNeamul Românesc,May 23, 1938, p. 4
  61. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 393–395
  62. ^Ornea (1995), p. 186
  63. ^Săndulescu, pp. 165–166
  64. ^Ioan C. Popa, "Theodor Magder – destinul unui evreu român în Basarabia", inLimba Română,Issue 1/2019, p. 361
  65. ^Stahl (1981), pp. 397–398
  66. ^Stahl (1980), p. 698. See also Boia, pp. 14, 34; Herseni, p. 574
  67. ^Vintilă, p. 531
  68. ^Bulgaru, p. XXXI
  69. ^Golopenția, pp. 150, 151, 153, 155–156, 163, 166, 177, 186, 196; Stahl (1980), pp. 701, 703; (1981), pp. 120, 199, 221. See also Bulgaru, p. XXXI
  70. ^abcdStahl (1980), p. 703
  71. ^"Adeziunile funcționarilor Centralei fundației culturale regale 'Principele Carol' și serviciului social la 'Frontul Renașterii Naționale'", inNeamul Românesc,January 19, 1939, p. 3
  72. ^"Solemnitatea depunerii jurământului studenților din Capitală în Frontul Național Studențesc. La facultatea de Litere și Filosofie", inRomânia,January 27, 1940, p. 7
  73. ^"Membri ai corpului didactic cari și-au reluat catedrele", inNeamul Românesc,November 8, 1939, p. 3
  74. ^abStahl (1981), p. 399
  75. ^abc(in Romanian)Stelian Neagoe,Constantin Argetoianu,"Din însemnările zilnice ale lui Constantin Argetoianu (41)",inJurnalul Național,January 14, 2011
  76. ^abDaniel Chirot,Modern Tyrants: The Power and Prevalence of Evil in Our Age.Princeton University Press,Princeton, 1995,ISBN0-691-02777-3,p. 239
  77. ^abRoland Clark, "New Models, New Questions: Historiographical Approaches to the Romanian Holocaust", in theEuropean Review of History,Vol. 19, Issue 2, 2012, p. 310
  78. ^Ioanid, p. 128
  79. ^Ornea (1995), pp. 383–384
  80. ^Ioanid, p. 134
  81. ^Ioanid, p. 128; Săndulescu, pp. 159–160
  82. ^Florin Müller, "Revoluția fascistă — dimensiuni teoretice; cazul românesc", inRevista de Științe Politice și Relații Internaționale,Vol. VII, Issue 1, 2010, p. 104
  83. ^Ioanid, p. 122
  84. ^Final Reportof theInternational Commission on the Holocaust in Romania.Polirom,Iași, 2004,ISBN973-681-989-2,p. 50; Mihaela Gligor, "Precursori ai antisemitismului interbelic românesc", in Monica Albu, Ionuț Isac, Vasile Marian, Andrei Negru, Silviu G. Totelecan (eds.),Studii și cercetări din domeniul științelor socio-umane. Vol. 21.Editura Argonaut, Cluj-Napoca, 2011,ISBN978-973-109-269-0,p. 131; Ioanid, pp. 122–123; Turda (2007), p. 438
  85. ^Ioanid, pp. 122–123. Alternative translation in Turda (2007), pp. 438–439
  86. ^Thorne, p. 183
  87. ^Ioanid, p. 123
  88. ^Bucur, pp. 188, 211, 224
  89. ^Turda (2007), p. 439
  90. ^Thorne, pp. 182–184
  91. ^Boia, pp. 158–159; Săndulescu, p. 157; Vintilă, p. 532. See also Rostás & Văcărescu, p. 359
  92. ^Stan, p. 33
  93. ^Veronica Turcuș, Șerban Turcuș, "România legionară și impactul asupra instituțiilor de cultură. Studiu de caz –Accademia di Romaniadin Roma ", inAnuarul Institutului de Istorie G. Barițiu,Vol. LII, 2013, pp. 267–269
  94. ^C. Popescu-Cadem,Document în replică,Mihail Sadoveanu City Library, Bucharest, 2007,ISBN978-973-8369-21-4,pp. 312–319, 330–332, 335–336. See also Boia, pp. 173–182
  95. ^Boia, pp. 172–173
  96. ^Ioana Ieronim,Matei Călinescu,"Identitățile noastre", inRevista 22,Issue 434, June 1998, p. 12
  97. ^abBoia, p. 182
  98. ^Gheorghe I. Florescu, "N. Iorga și America", inZargidava. Revistă de Istorie,Vol. XII, 2013, pp. 168–169
  99. ^Tatiana Slama-Cazacu,"Mihai Ralea: o personalitate controversată", inRomânia Literară,Issue 1/1997, pp. 12, 14
  100. ^abPetre Pandrea,Memoriile mandarinului valah. Jurnal I: 1954–1956,Editura Vremea,Bucharest, 2011,ISBN978-973-645-440-0,p. 428
  101. ^"Virgil Madgearu intelectualul, economistul și profesorul", inGazeta Municipală,May 11, 1941, p. 4
  102. ^Silvia Bocancea, "Principiul descentralizării administrative în viziunea lui Petre Andrei", inTransilvania,Issue 11/2011, pp. 76–77
  103. ^Ion Mușlea, "Le mouvement folklorique roumain de 1940 à 1946", inSchweizerisches Archiv für Volkskunde,Vol. 44, 1947, pp. 159–160
  104. ^Katherine Verdery,National Ideology under Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics in Ceaușescu's Romania,University of California Press,Berkeley etc., 1995,ISBN0-520-20358-5,p. 66
  105. ^Herseni, p. 583
  106. ^Herseni, pp. 584–585
  107. ^Clark, p. 246
  108. ^Băieșu, pp. 108–110; Popa (2020),passim
  109. ^Stahl (1980), p. 698. See also Boia, p. 203
  110. ^Cezar Corneliu Manda, "Noi tendințe conceptuale în evoluția științei administrației în perioda modernă", inSocietate și Politică. Revista Centrului de Cercetări Sociale, Științe Politice și Administrative,Issue 2, November 2009, pp. 74–75, 76
  111. ^Popa (2020), p. 107
  112. ^(in Romanian)Andrei Șiperco,"Holocaustul evreilor din România: experimentul Transnistria",inObservator Cultural,Issue 208, February 2004
  113. ^Rep., "Viața politică. 107 legionari 'învoiți' de Prefectură. Col. Manolescu directorul Siguranței a fost arestat", inRomânia Liberă,December 30, 1944, p. 3
  114. ^abBăieșu, p. 110; Popa (2020), p. 111
  115. ^abcdOctavian Roske (ed.),Mecanisme represive în România 1945–1989. Dicționar biografic H–L,Bucharest, National Institute for the Study of Totalitarianism, 2004,ISBN973-86654-5-0,p. 87
  116. ^Boia, p. 257; Săndulescu, p. 175
  117. ^Ioan Lăcustă,"31 ianuarie 1946. Miniștrii guvernului Groza hotărăsc: Răfuiala continuă!", inMagazin Istoric,July 1995, p. 14
  118. ^Bosomitu, p. 180; Săndulescu, p. 175
  119. ^(in Romanian)Ion Papuc,"Ceea ce știu",inConvorbiri Literare,January 2006
  120. ^Bosomitu, pp. 180, 181
  121. ^abcdEugen Negrici,Iluziile literaturii române.Cartea Românească,Bucharest, 2008,ISBN978-973-23-1974-1,p. 267
  122. ^Adrian Neculau, "Cronica ideilor. Cazul Ralea", inCronica,Vol. II, Issue 3, March 2012, p. 18
  123. ^abStahl (1980), pp. 698, 702
  124. ^Bosomitu, pp. 170–171, 185–187, 194–195
  125. ^Bosomitu, pp. 185–187
  126. ^G. T. Kirileanu,Constantin Prangati, "Inedit. Jurnal – 1958 (II)", inAteneu,Vol. 36, Issue 5, May 1999, p. 3
  127. ^Constantin, p. 99
  128. ^Turda (2010), pp. 6–7
  129. ^abBucur, p. 44
  130. ^Turda (2010), p. 7
  131. ^abAlexandru Gh. Sonoc, Alexandru Grișcan, "Clișee mitologizante din istoria geto-dacilor în context aniversar (1986)", inBrvkenthal. Acta Mvsei,Vol. III, Issue 1, 2008, pp. 128–129, 147
  132. ^Constantin, pp. 99, 105, 109
  133. ^Grigore Ploeșteanu, "Un iluminist român în secolul al XIX-lea — Paul Vasici", inStudii. Revistă de Istorie,Issue 24/1971, pp. 93, 96
  134. ^Ornea (1995), p. 188
  135. ^Bosomitu, pp. 181–182
  136. ^Bosomitu, p. 183; Stahl (1980), p. 703; Zamfiret al.,p. 7
  137. ^Edgar Krau,Social and Economic Management in the Competitive Society.Kluwer Academic Publishers,Dordrecht, 1998,ISBN0-7923-8028-2,pp. 36–37
  138. ^abZamfiret al.,p. 7
  139. ^Mihai Demetriade, "Victor Biriș, cel mai important agent de influență din penitenciarul Aiud (1957–1963)", inCaietele CNSAS,Issues 1–2/2012, p. 144
  140. ^Săndulescu, p. 175
  141. ^Vladimir Tismăneanu,Stalinism pentru eternitate.Polirom,Iași, 2005,ISBN973-681-899-3,pp. 219–220
  142. ^Lozinsky, pp. 171–172
  143. ^Bosomitu, p. 188
  144. ^Lozinsky, p. 170
  145. ^abcdeStahl (1980), p. 702
  146. ^Săndulescu, pp. 175–176
  147. ^Radu Negru, "Cunoașterea filosofică (I). Critica, sau negarea negației", inAteneu,Vol. V, Issue 2, February 1968, p. 16
  148. ^Crișan, pp. 126–127
  149. ^Crișan, p. 126
  150. ^Nicolae S. Dumitru, "Sociologia retrospectivelor", inViitorul Social,Issue 2/1972, pp. 350–352
  151. ^Geta Deleanu, "Tudor Ionescu", inEx-Ponto,Vol. VI, Issue 1, January–March 2008, p. 48
  152. ^Chelcea, p. 257
  153. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 702, 703
  154. ^Victoria Popovici, "Spiru Haret și răscoala din 1907", inRevista de Istorie,Issue 2/1977, p. 222
  155. ^Lozinsky,passim
  156. ^Irina Tomescu-Dubrow, "Social Inequality and Social Problems in Romania: Old and New Patterns", in Heinrich Best, Agnieszka Wenninger (eds.),Landmark 1989: Central and Eastern European Societies Twenty Years after the System Change,LIT Verlag,Berlin, 2010,ISBN978-3-643-10449-6,p. 177
  157. ^Chelcea, pp. 242–243, 249–250
  158. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 703, 704
  159. ^Jiří Kolaja, "Book Reviews. Traian Herseni,Prolegomene la teoria sociologică",inSocial Research,Vol. 37, Issue 3, 1970, pp. 492–493
  160. ^Lovinescu, p. 403
  161. ^Lovinescu, pp. 403–406
  162. ^Andrei Strihan, "Dialectica unei noțiuni. Însemnări despre conceptul de frumos", inArgeș,Vol. II, Issue 11, November 1967, p. 6
  163. ^abM. Lunca, "...măsura tuturor lucrurilor...", inLuceafărul,Vol. XXII, Issue 27, July 1979, p. 6
  164. ^Constantin Coșman, "Recenzie.Psihologia culturii de masă",inClopotul,March 12, 1969, p. 2
  165. ^Stahl (1980), p. 703; Stăvărache, p. 164
  166. ^Stăvărache, pp. 163–166, 170–176
  167. ^Stăvărache, pp. 170, 172–174
  168. ^Stăvărache, p. 165
  169. ^Stăvărache, pp. 174–176
  170. ^Stăvărache, pp. 166–167
  171. ^abStăvărache, p. 168
  172. ^Stăvărache, p. 171
  173. ^Stăvărache, p. 176
  174. ^Ion Zainea, "Aspecte din activitatea cenzurii comuniste: controlul producției de carte social-politică. Tendinṭe și fenomene semnalate în cursul anului 1972", inCrisia,Vol. 41, Issue 1, 2011, p. 337
  175. ^abStahl (1980), p. 704
  176. ^Didă, pp. 46, 48–50, 52–57
  177. ^Stahl (1981), p. 141
  178. ^Florin Constantiniu,"Sensibilități și mentalități în societatea românească a secolului al XVII-lea", inRevista de Istorie,Issue 1/1980, p. 152
  179. ^Lucia Berdan, "Neamul ritualic", inAnuar de Lingvistică și Istorie Literară,Vols. XLII–XLIII, 2002–2003, p. 192
  180. ^Victor Cirimpei, "Datina arderii unei buturugi la solstițiul de iarnă", inPhilologia,Vol. LV, September–December 2013, p. 120
  181. ^Stelian Dumitrăscel, "Expresii și mentalități. Muma Cordului", inContemporanul,Vol. VII, Issue 35, August 1996, p. 5
  182. ^S. I. Nicolaescu, "Excelsior. O nouă interpretare aMioriței",inArgeș,Vol. XVII, Issue 1, March 1982, p. 2
  183. ^Corneliu Bălosu, "Repertoriul poetic al colindatului din Țara Loviștei", inBuridava. Studii și Materiale,Vol. VIII, 2010, p. 425
  184. ^Șerban Cioculescu,"Breviar. Ion Codru-Dragușanu înDicționarul folcloriștilor",inRomânia Literară,Issue 36/1979, p. 7
  185. ^Radu Drăgulescu, "Analysis of the Connotative and Denotative Meanings of the Romanian TermZmeu(Dragon) as It Appears in the [sic] Romanian Phytonymy ", inJournal of Romanian Literary Studies,Issue 10, 2017, pp. 106–107
  186. ^Lozinsky, p. 171
  187. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 702, 704
  188. ^Zamfira Mihail, "Etnolingvistica în scrierile lui G. Ivănescu și în perspectivă coșeriană", inAnuarul de Lingvistică și Istorie Literară,Vol. LIII, 2013, pp. 159–160, 167
  189. ^Stahl (1980), pp. 702–703
  190. ^Rostás & Văcărescu, pp. 357–359
  191. ^George Voicu,"Teme antisemite în discursul public", inSfera Politicii,Issue 82/2000, pp. 49, 55
  192. ^Bulgaru, p. 79; Stan, pp. 27, 36, 37

References

[edit]
  • Nicolae Băieșu, "Observații privind cultura populară a românilor de la est de Nistru, de Bug, din Nordul Caucazului", inAkademos,Issue 2/2009, pp. 104–112.
  • Lucian Boia,Capcanele istoriei. Elita intelectuală românească între 1930 și 1950.Humanitas,Bucharest, 2012,ISBN978-973-50-3533-4
  • Ștefan Bosomitu, "Notes and Remarks on the (Re)Institutionalization of Sociology in Communist Romania in the 60s", inHistory of Communism in Europe,Vol. 2, 2011, pp. 169–196.
  • Maria Bucur,Eugenics and Modernization in Interwar Romania.University of Pittsburgh Press,Pittsburgh, 2002,ISBN0-8229-4172-4
  • Elena Bulgaru,Gheorghe Vlădescu Răcoasa. Biobibliografie.Central University Library,Bucharest, 2012,ISBN978-973-88947-4-7
  • Septimiu Chelcea,Inițiere în cercetarea sociologică.Comunicare.ro, Bucharest, 2004,ISBN973-711-027-7
  • Roland Clark,Sfîntă tinerețe legionară. Activismul fascist în România interbelică.Polirom,Iași, 2015,ISBN978-973-46-5357-7
  • Marin Constantin, "Etnocentrism și relativism cultural în abordarea omologică și analogică a identității etno-culturale din România", in Andrei Kozma, Cristiana Glavce,Constantin Bălăceanu-Stolnici(eds.),Antropologie și interdisciplinaritate.Editura Niculescu,Bucharest, 2014,ISBN978-973-748-855-8,pp. 96–109.
  • A. Crișan, "Revista revistelor.Familia.Delimitări ", inLupta de Clasă,Vol. XLVII, Issue 11, November 1967, pp. 126–128.
  • Diana Didă, "Știința națiunii și geopolitica. Contribuția Școlii de sociologie de la București la dezvoltarea geopoliticii în perioada interbelică", inRevista de Științe Politice și Relații Internaționale,Vol. VIII, Issue 4, 2011, pp. 41–58.
  • Sanda Golopenția,"Al XIV-lea Congres internațional de sociologie (București 1939–Roma 1950)", inRevista Română de Sociologie,Vol. XXVI, Issues 3–4, 2015, pp. 145–206.
  • Traian Herseni, "Sociologia", inNicolae Bagdasar,Traian Herseni, S. S. Bârsănescu (eds.),Istoria filosofiei moderne, V. Filosofia românească dela origini până astăzi.Romanian Philosophical Society, Bucharest, 1941, pp. 437–598.
  • Radu Ioanid,"Extracts fromCharacteristics of Rumanian Fascism",inRoger Griffin,Matthew Feldman (eds.),Fascism (Critical Concepts in Political Science). Vol. IV.Routledge,London & New York City, 2004,ISBN0-415-29019-8,pp. 119–141.
  • Monica Lovinescu,Unde scurte.Humanitas, Bucharest, 1990,ISBN973-28-0172-7
  • Florența Lozinsky, "Traian Herseni, cronicar laFamilia",in Monica Albu, Ionuț Isac, Vasile Marian, Andrei Negru (eds.),Studii și cercetări din domeniul științelor socio-umane. Vol. 18.Editura Argonaut, Cluj-Napoca, 2009,ISBN978-973-109-150-1,pp. 170–178.
  • Lucian Nastasă,"Suveranii" universităților românești. Mecanisme de selecție și promovare a elitei intelectuale,Vol. I.Editura Limes,Cluj-Napoca, 2007,ISBN978-973-726-278-3
  • Z. Ornea,Anii treizeci. Extrema dreaptă românească.Editura Fundației Culturale Române,Bucharest, 1995,ISBN973-9155-43-X
  • Ioan C. Popa, "Cercetările sociologice la est de Nistru și de Bug anchetate de Securitate", inLimba Română,Issue 1/2020, pp. 106–120.
  • Zoltán Rostás,Theodora-Eliza Văcărescu, "Women's Participation in Professor Dimitrie Gusti's Monographic Campaigns. A Working Hypothesis", in Enikő Magyari Vincze, Petruța Mândruț (eds.),Performing Identities. Renegotiating Socio-cultural Identities in the Post-socialist Eastern Europe.EFES, Cluj-Napoca, 2004,ISBN973-8254-60-4,pp. 357–368.
  • Valentin Săndulescu, "Convertiri și reconvertiri: elite academice și culturale și schimbare politică în România anilor 1930–1960", in Cristian Vasile (ed.),"Ne trebuie oameni!". Elite intelectuale și transformări istorice în România modernă și contemporană.Nicolae Iorga Institute of History& Editura Cetatea de Scaun, Târgoviște, 2017,ISBN978-606-537-385-3,pp. 141–180.
  • Henri H. Stahl,
    • "Traian Herseni (1907–1980). O evocare", inViitorul Social,Issue 4/1980, pp. 698–704.
    • Amintiri și gînduri din vechea școală a monografiilor sociologice.Editura Minerva,Bucharest, 1981.
  • Dumitru Stan, "Sociologia academică ieșeană de la origini la Petre Andrei", inTransilvania,Issue 11/2011, pp. 26–37.
  • Florența Stăvărache, "Literatura din perspectiva lui Traian Herseni: semnificația sociologică și antropologică", inAnuarul Institutului de Istorie George Bariț din Cluj-Napoca. Series Humanistica,Vol. II, 2004, pp. 163–177.
  • M. Benjamin Thorne, "Assimilation, Invisibility, and the Eugenic Turn in the 'Gypsy Question' in Romanian Society, 1938–1942", inRomani Studies,Vol. 21, Issue 2, December 2011, pp. 177–205.
  • Marius Turda,
    • "The Nation as Object: Race, Blood, and Biopolitics in Interwar Romania", inSlavic Review,Vol. 66, Issue 3, 2007, pp. 413–441.
    • "Introduction: Whither Race? Physical Anthropology in post-1945 Central and Southeastern Europe", inFocaal,Vol. 58, 2010, pp. 3–15.
  • Alexandru-Ovidiu Vintilă, "Traian Brăileanu, sub semnul imperativului categoric (excurs biobibliografic)", inRevista Română de Sociologie,Issues 5–6/2010, pp. 508–539.
  • Cătălin Zamfir, Simona Stănescu, Simona Ilie, Flavius Mihalache, Iancu Filipescu, "Șapte faze de istorie socială turbulentă a sociologiei românești", inSociologie Românească,Vol. VIII, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 3–16.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Traian_Herseni&oldid=1258884161"