Grǎdina rozelor: femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania
Gespeichert in:
| Beteiligte Personen: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Rumänisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Bucureşti
Editura Academiei Române
2015
|
| Schlagwörter: | |
| Links: | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| Umfang: | 381 Seiten, 12 ungezählte Seiten Bildtafeln Illustrationen, Notenbeispiel, Porträts |
| ISBN: | 9789732725078 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV043468404 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20160426 | ||
| 007 | t| | ||
| 008 | 160318s2015 xx agcl |||| 00||| rum d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789732725078 |9 978-973-27-2507-8 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)953103449 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)OBVAC13012359 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a rum | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-Re13 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Barbu, Violeta |d 1957-2018 |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)1084357348 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Grǎdina rozelor |b femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |c Violeta Barbu, Maria Magdalena Székely, Kinga S. Tüdős, Angela Jianu |
| 246 | 1 | 1 | |a Le jardin des roses |
| 246 | 1 | 1 | |a A garden of roses |
| 264 | 1 | |a Bucureşti |b Editura Academiei Române |c 2015 | |
| 300 | |a 381 Seiten, 12 ungezählte Seiten Bildtafeln |b Illustrationen, Notenbeispiel, Porträts | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 546 | |a Englische Zusammenfassung | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1600-1900 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Moldau |g Fürstentum |0 (DE-588)4039965-5 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Walachei |0 (DE-588)4118956-5 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Siebenbürgen |0 (DE-588)4054835-1 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Siebenbürgen |0 (DE-588)4054835-1 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Moldau |g Fürstentum |0 (DE-588)4039965-5 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Walachei |0 (DE-588)4118956-5 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1600-1900 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Székely, Maria Magdalena |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tüdős, S. Kinga |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jianu, Angela |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 305.309 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 439 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 306.09 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 439 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 306.09 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 498 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 305.309 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 498 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 929 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 439 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 929 |e 22/bsb |f 0903 |g 498 |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028885480 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1819301291003740160 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | ABSTRACT
A Garden of Roses:
Women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania
(l7th_19th Centuries)
VIOLETA BARBU, MARIA MAGDALENA SZÉKELY, KINGA S. TÜDÓS,
ANGELA JIANU
This book was bom out of the authors’ wish to explore one particular type of social experience in the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania of the old regime: women’s experience. Apart from capturing often fascinating biographical details about better- or lesser-known individual female figures, the life narratives included in this volume are also meant to be alternative pathways into the understanding of old-regime Romania via the roles played by women. Whether one looks at the domestic space or at aspects of economic, political, religious and cultural life, women are found to be active either as protagonists or in minor, anonymous roles from the early modem period to the nineteenth century and beyond. Despite the relative scarcity of documentary sources in the three provinces and the comparative absence of female literary characters or of first-person female voices, occasionally a woman’s profile will stand out. Using life narratives and collective portraits as formats, we have put together a ‘bouquet’ of women’s biographies, showcased against the backdrop of sociopolitical and cultural developments in the two Romanian provinces and Transylvania. The ‘bouquet’ is a reference to the title of this volume, A Garden of Roses, inspired by an anthology of writings by the visionary Saint Marguerite-Maria Alacoque (1647—1690) (Jo illatu Rozsas Kert, A Rose Garden Most Fragrant). It was translated into Hungarian by the Countess Sigray Erzsebet Roza in 1703 in Vienna and published in Bratislava in 1712 with the support of the Transylvanian Count Samuel Kalnoky and his daughter Hedvig. It is not so much the delicate beauty of the roses that lies behind the choice of title, but the metaphorical suggestions of the garden as a liminal area between the intimacy of the home and the openness of the public space.
The women included in this volume differ widely in terms of individual circumstances and socio-anthropological status: they may be in their prime or past it, in the higher echelons of society or in humble, anonymous positions as daughters, wives, mothers, sisters, grandmothers, mothers-in-law, mistresses, widows, elite patrons of culture and the Church or illiterate burghers and peasants. Among them we find rich ladies who manage complex estates, but also women who can barely make ends meet. Some were enterprising and thrifty, others were happy or miserable, empowered or abused, intelligent, skilled, brave, independent, charitable, gifted or flawed. Whenever possible, we have tried to identify the events which had an impact on these women’s lives and the ways in which they overcame obstacles and traumas, the risks they assumed and the influence they had on their surroundings. In some of the life histories, we think we have uncovered attitudes and behaviours which would appear to have contributed to the emergence of a clear individual self-awareness as opposed to broader social group affiliations, especially where religious or cultural diversity was compounded by migration and a change in spatial coordinates.
The group portraits are meant to highlight the specific contribution women made to social change in the periods considered. Our findings show that this was especially the case in the support women gave to institutions such as the family and the church, as well as in their impact on society’s evolving standards of civilization. Women were involved in promoting a taste for a better quality of life, in the circulation of goods and ideas, and made a contribution to overall economic growth. Their impact on the emergence of a more equitable distribution of justice and their contribution to the ultimate triumph of certain political causes, especially in the nineteenth centuiy, can no longer be ignored. From this perspective, the life narratives outlined in this volume offer important insights into
365
the articulations and dynamics of family, lineage, class, confession, language, professions, and networks of sociability.
Reconstructing the biography of lady (jupaneasa) Todosia (Maria Magdalena Szekely,
Portrait of a lady with a pendant. Todosia Nicorifiaia ) was no easy task, chiefly due to discontinuities in the available sources: for lengthy stretches of time she is not mentioned, and the narrative of her life can only be pieced together via imaginative guesswork. Consequently, a specific method had to be employed, which required the researcher to construct mirror images of episodes of her life indirectly from the known information on contemporary persons or events. Todosia was the daughter of Dumitru Bamovschi, a grandpostelnik during the reign of Prince Ieremia MovilS (1595-1606), and of Elisabeta (Ilisafta), whose genealogy remains obscure. She had several sisters married with high dignitaries. Her brother, Miron Bamovschi, became ruling prince of Moldavia in 1626. In the early years of the seventeenth century, Todosia married Vasile Lozonschi, brother of the Princess Elisabeta, consort of Ieremia Movila. This first husband, a violent man who drank and was prone to fits of uncontrollable anger, was notorious for his reckless behaviour. In December 1611, the ruling prince §tefan Tom$a II (1611-1615) deposed Constantin, the minor son of Prince Ieremia, forcing the Movila family into exile in Poland. The following year their attempt to return to the throne of Moldavia failed after the battle of Comul lui Sas. In the midst of battle, Lozonschi was taken prisoner by the Tatars, but was freed for a large ransom. The stun was sourced from the dowry of Todosia, who later took her mother-in-law to court, asking for damages. In November 1613, Vasile Lozonschi was killed by Captain Jan Chanski, a Polish nobleman with whom he had a history of conflict. With the death of Lozonschi, it would appear that Todosia’s life became calmer and more settled, but not entirely devoid of the troubles ensuing from her links with her highly-placed Moldavian male kin.
Upon her return to her homeland after a few years’ exile in Poland, the now widowed lady re-married. Nothing is known about the family of the new husband, Nicoara (NicorijS), grand vomik of Tara de Sus, except that it might have had a foreign origin, as suggested by the double-headed eagle on this high official’s seal. As a sign of affection, Nicoara offered his wife a golden pendant on a chain, unusual both in terms of design and function. This item, for a long time thought to be just a golden coin, must have been in fact a wedding gift, similar to the nuptial belts and rings offered as wedding gifts in the Byzantine world. Nicoara was very close to his wife’s brother, Miron Bamovschi. Under his brother-in-law’s reign (1626-9), he was rewarded with the rank of hetman. In 1629, when Miron was deposed and exiled, Nicoara stood by him. Thus started lady Todosia’s second exile.
The former hetman died some time in 1630, and Todosia was a widow for a second time. Their marriage, which lasted for almost ten and a half years, appears to have been serene and prosperous. Together, the spouses purchased villages, bee yards, ponds and mills. They owned two houses in the Moldavian capital, Ia§i, as well as a manor house in Bicani, in the Tutova region. The spouses subsidized the building of a church in Ia§i, on the hill of Tatara§i, the church of Saint John the New. Turning it into a monasteiy, they dedicated it to a holy place in Jerusalem (the monastery of Saint Sava), together with a large number of villages, vineyards, mills, ponds, bee yards, houses and cattle. The couple did not have children, yet, due to hurried or erroneous readings of sources or greed-driven genealogical fictions, descendants were nevertheless ‘created’ for them. In actual fact, Nicoara and Todosia divided their wealth between the monastery they founded and their nephews. Impoverished and downwardly mobile, the hetman s collateral descendants went on to found a number of less distinguished families.
After her husband’s death, Todosia lived for a few years mostly in Poland. On rare occasions, she travelled to Moldavia to sort out her affairs, make donations to the Ia$i monastery or administer the modest assets she still possessed there. Miron Bamovshi had left debts behind, and Todosia had to pay them from sales of her own villages and farmland. In addition, it took her a long time to pay back debts which she had incurred herself. In Poland Todosia and her brother lived in the castle of Uscie, which had been purchased, together with the surrounding estate, by Miron Bamovschi from Ana, daughter of Prince Ieremia Movila and wife of the Marshall of the Court, Maksymilian Przer^bski. Most probably she was still in Poland when she learnt that the ruling prince Miron, whom the boyars had brought back to the throne for a second time in 1633, had been decapitated in Constantinople on the sultan’s order. Thus started the last and most spectacular stage in Todosia’s life.
366
Not long after the decapitation of Miron B am o vs chi, the peace of the castle of Uscie was troubled by the arrival of two Polish noblemen, Maksymilian Przer^bski and Jeremi Wisniowiecki (the first, a son-in-law of the Moldavian ruling prince Ieremia Movila, the second, a nephew of the same). Claiming that Bamovschi had not met the contractual prerequisites for the estate’s purchase, they stormed the castle, opened all the coffers and took everything, including the cattle grazing on the domain. Bent on revenge, Todosia hired the mercenaries under the command of Captain Jerzy Kruzinski to attack the fortified citadel of Uscie. Fearing a prolonged siege which would have drained his forces, Maksymilian Przer^bski capitulated, asking only for his retreat to be guaranteed, which was granted. Like a queen of the Amazons, Todosia made a triumphant entrance into the citadel, took possession of her brother’s wealth at Uscie and received the oath of loyalty from her subjects. There was nothing left for Maksymilian Przer^bski to do but to compile venomous memoirs, in which he asked for Todosia to be stripped of her wealth and sent to court. Ultimately, the court found her guilty and sentenced her to death by decapitation, but Todosia found a way of pre-empting this decision: she married a member of the Polish szlachta, the Captain Jan Podhorecki, and received from the king a safe-conduct which annulled the court’s decision. In 1635, the king also granted her ownership of three villages on the estate of Uscie. At the end of an exceptional and tumultuous life, lady Todosia died without issue, probably in Poland, some time in the fifth decade of the seventeenth century. The whereabouts of her grave are unknown.
Ecaterina-Dafina Dabija (Maria Magdalena Szekely, Portrait of a lady without a portrait. Ecaterina-Dafina Dabija *) was bom, probably around 1615, in the family of the paharnik Iona$co Jora and his wife, Simina, bom Alexa Arapu. Through her father, she descended from an old line of Moldavian boyars, documented as early as the mid-fifteenth century. Her ancestor on the maternal line, Arapu, could have been a Christian merchant from the easternmost areas of the Ottoman Empire who settled in Moldavia. This supposed origin might explain why the Archdeacon Paul of Aleppo wrote that Dafina ‘is our kin and comes from our line’. Her unusual surname, Dafina, is the Romanian form of the Greek Daphni and the equivalent of the Italian Laura. As Princess of Moldavia, she was also known as Ecaterina (Caterina, Catrina).
Around 1640, Dafina married the grand visternik Dumitru (Dumitra^co) Buhu§, who was a widower with children. Together, they had a daughter, Anastasia (see below, ‘Portrait of a princess with a lover. Anastasia Duca *), and a son, Lupu (Lupa§co). After the death of Dumitru Buhu§ (15 March 1647), Dafina married the serdar §tefan, who had been married himself. Caught up in the conspiracy initiated by the great logothete Gheorghe §tefan against the ruling prince Vasile Lupu (1634—1653), the serdar was captured and killed by the palace guards. Around 1657, lady Dafina married again, to the great vomik of Tara de Sus, Eustratie Dabija, a widower with no children of his own. This is how Dafina became Princess of Moldavia in 1661. The princely couple had a daughter, Maria. Anastasia, Dafina’s daughter from her first marriage, was married to an ethnic Greek from Rumelia, Duca, the future prince of Moldavia. As consort of the ruling prince, Dafina was authorized to issue orders. One such order, dating from 1663, was sent to the wife of the grand paharnik, and referred to a prohibition on the sale of that year’s wine production. This happened while Prince Eustratie took part, alongside Ottoman troops and the Wallachian prince Grigore Ghica, in the siege of the citadel of Ujvar. Before his departure, presumably, the prince had made his will, which included a comprehensive list of villages to be inherited by his wife and daughter.
But Dafina chose not to rely solely on the security of a future inheritance and made some investments of her own by purchasing a number of villages. Like all other princess consorts of Moldavia, she had her own court with her own courtiers and scribes. The heraldic emblem on her signet ring was the Moldavian aurochs with a star between its horns and a motto reading: ‘Princess Caterina of Moldavia’. The title she used in documents was ‘Consort of Prince Eustratie Dabija’. In 1664, when the rulers of the Romanian Principalities who supported the Ottomans in the siege of the citadel of Leva left the camp, Dafina advised her husband to return to Belgrade and explain his desertion rather than risk being considered a traitor by the suzerain Porte. This period of domestic happiness and prosperity came to an end on 11 September 1665, when Prince Eustratie died. The old ruler was buried with due pomp at the Monastery of Bamova, his own foundation, under a stone laid by his widow.
A widow for the third and last time, Princess Dafina went to Constantinople, where she obtained Moldavia’s throne for her son-in-law, visternik Duca, who only lasted in that position for
367
several months (1665-1666). The entire family, including the widowed princess, had to relocate to Constantinople. Although this is not explicit in all the documents, Princess Dafina must have accompanied her daughter in all the periods of exile which followed. Her presence in Moldavia is documented only for the periods of Gheorghe Duca’s reigns. Her repeated absences were exploited by individuals back home who attempted to gain ownership of some of Dabija’s estates. Testimonies from the ensuing trials show, albeit indirectly, that during the time of her son-in-law’s Wallachian reign (1673-1678), Princess Dafina resided in Wallachia’s capital city, Bucharest. On this occasion, together with her daughter Anastasia, she attempted to defuse the conflict between Gheorghe Duca and the Cantacuzino boyars, siding with the latter. It was during the same Wallachian period that Princess Dafina married her youngest daughter, Maria, to the postelnik Iordache Ruset. However, Maria, who was only fifteen, died soon afterwards, in 1677, and was buried in Moldavia, in the church of the Monastery Bámova.
During Gheorghe Duca’s third reign in Moldavia (1678-1683), Dafina was back in Ia§i. Documents appear to suggest that the old lady was still alive around 1686-1687, and it is quite possible that she died in exile and is buried in a foreign land. Prince Dabija’s consort was a rich woman. Part of her assets went towards the dowry of her youngest daughter, Maria. She also used her wealth to make donations to monasteries, especially to the Monastery of Bámova, founded by her husband, Eustratie Dabija. The only surviving item out of all the ones she donated to this monastery is a chalice dated 1665. Dafina is also known as the donor of an altar cloth (1664—1665), today in the Monastery Neamtu. With her husband, she commissioned a manuscript Gospel for the Monastery Ca§in (1665), which today is in Jerusalem. It is generally accepted that she was the founder, or at least the resident, of a manor at Tigane^ti, in the county of Tecuci. The logothete and poet Costache Conachi, later the owner of the village, composed an elegy on the ruins of this foundation. Princess Dafina also became a character of fiction. During his residence in Bessarabia, A. S. Pushkin, the Russian Romantic, came across a popular legend, Dafna and Dabija, which he intended to use as a basis for a novella. The Romanian writer Mihail Sadoveanu created a suggestive cameo portrait of her in his novel, The Sign of Cancer, or the Times of Prince Duca (Rom. Zodia Cancerului sau Vremea Ducái voda).
Sadly, earlier views claiming that previously anonymous female portraits were in fact visual representations of Princess Dafina have proved inaccurate. Ecaterina-Dafina remains a princess without a portrait and, due to the total absence of information on her death and burial, also a princess without a grave.
Ecaterina-Dafina’s daughter by her first husband, the grand vistemik Dumitru Buhu§, is the subject of Maria Magdalena Székely’s essay Portrait of a princess with a lover. Anastasia Duca. Upon the death of Dumitru Buhu§ in 1647, Anastasia and her brother, Lupu (Lupa§co), were left in their mother’s care. Anastasia was literate, as suggested by her surviving signatures in Romanian and Greek. Around 8 April 1662, she married Duca, an ethnic Greek who had settled in Moldavia as a veiy young man and who, during the reign of Eustratie Dabija (1661-1665), occupied two of that province’s highest offices. In the autumn of 1665, when Prince Dabija died, Princess Dafina took her son-in-law to Constantinople, where she obtained Moldavia’s throne for him. After only a few months, however, Duca was deposed by the suzerain Porte and exiled to Constantinople with his entire family.
His return to the throne in the autumn of 1668 was secured through extortionate expenditures from the country’s budget, which created much anti-Greek feeling in a country burdened with taxes. Discontent turned into rebellion: while the prince was held captive at his court in Ia§i, his lady fled to neighbouring Wallachia, where she took refuge at Drágáne§ti, a village belonging to the former spathar $erban Cantacuzino. Gheorghe Duca returned to Moldavia’s throne around February 1672. It was during this second reign that Prince Duca built the Monastery Cetáfuia, a project to which Princess Anastasia contributed significantly. She started donating liturgical tapestries and other items as soon as the foundation stones were laid, as shown in the inscriptions on an orarion (1668-1669) and a chalice (1669-1670). It would appear that around the same time, Anastasia initiated a number of constructions at Agapia din Deal. In the autumn of 1672 the ruling family lost an infant girl, Maria, who was buried at Cetáfuia. Soon after that Prince Duca was deposed a second time and taken with the entire family to Constantinople, where Princess Anastasia appears to have re-connected with $erban Cantacuzino.
368
With solid support and hefty sums of money, Duca obtained the throne of neighbouring Wallachia. However, once in the capital city, Bucharest, he distanced himself from the Cantacuzinos, his supporters, and ended up persecuting and even sending them to prison. The Wallachian boyars sought the support of the Prince’s mother-in-law, Dafina, of Princess Anastasia and the latter’s brother, the spathar Lupa§co Buhu§, himself married to a woman from the Cantacuzino family. In the summer of 1678, while Gheorghe Duca was leading the siege of the citadel of Chekhrin (in Ukraine), the logothete §erban Cantacuzino was called to Constantinople by the Grand Vizier, who offered him the throne of Wallachia. Upon learning the news, Duca ordered the logothete arrested, but the latter, forewarned by Princess Anastasia, managed to flee to Adrianople (Edime).
Once §erban Cantacuzino was appointed ruler of Wallachia (1678-1688) and Antonie Ruset was exiled from Moldavia, Gheorghe Duca was transferred to Ia§i. Here, Princess Anastasia completed the repairs, initiated by her husband in 1679, of Biserica Alba (the White Church), later to become Moldavia’s Metropolitan Church. Her involvement in the project might have had a personal dimension, as her blood family had prior links to this place of worship. In 1681, the Ottoman Porte granted Gheorghe Duca the rank of hetman of Ukraine in addition to his other functions. He returned from Constantinople with an official ferman, an additional tug (horse-hair tail) to his banner and a husband for his eldest daughter, Ecaterina. This was §tefan, son of the former Wallachian ruler Radu Leon Tom$a (1664-1669). Gheorghe Duca and his rival, $erban Cantacuzino, were to meet again at the siege of Vienna in 1683.
From home, on 26 June 1683, Princess Anastasia wrote to Anna Bomemisza, the wife of Mihail Apaffy, the ruling prince of Transylvania, asking her for news of the Turkish army and of her husband, with whom she had lost contact. She signed the letter ‘Nastasia, Princess of Moldavia and Okraine’ [sic]. On the seal one can still see the faint outlines of the joint coats of arms of the two Romanian Principalities, as well as the Slavonic caption: ‘Princess Nastasia of Moldovlachia’. In her husband’s absence, Anastasia was authorized to issue orders, like her mother previously. After the defeat of the Turks under the walls of Vienna, the Romanian prince started on the return journey. In the meantime, however, the Moldavian throne had been claimed by §tefan Petriceicu, which forced Princess Anastasia to make her way towards the country’s south. Ignoring all advice and warnings, Gheorghe Duca crossed the mountains into Moldavia and reached Domne§ti, the estate of Princess Dafina in the county of Putna. There, he was arrested by $tefan Petriceicu’s men and taken into exile at Lviv in Poland (in today’s Ukraine). Meanwhile, Anastasia had travelled to Wallachia and then to Constantinople. In the night of 24 to 25 March 1685, Duca had a stroke and died on 31 March, to be buried in the church of the Dormition in Lviv. A letter sent by §erban Cantacuzino to the hierodeacon Chrisantos Notaras on 27 July 1685 shows the extent to which the Wallachian ruler was concerned about Anastasia’s welfare after the sudden death of his erstwhile adversary.
While in Constantinople, Princess Anastasia had one of her sons, Constantin, engaged to Maria, daughter of the Wallachian prince Constantin Brancoveanu (1668-1714), and her own daughter Maria to Antioch, the son of the Moldavian prince Constantin Cantemir (1685-1693). She herself married Liberaki Gherakari, a Greek adventurer who had obtained from the Turks the title of ‘bey of Mani’. Believing Gherakari’s claims that he wished to establish his own principality, Anastasia supported him financially, only to find herself abandoned by a man in perpetual search of new adventures.
The Princess’s fate was to change in 1693, when her son Constantin became ruling prince of Moldavia. Upon her return, there were official ceremonies marking her son’s court wedding, as well as the reburial of Duca’s remains at the Monastery of Cet piia. In the spring of 1694, Anastasia accompanied her daughter-in-law on a visit to her parents, an occasion which was celebrated lavishly at the Wallachian court. Back in Moldavia, Anastasia continued her protection of the Metropolitan Church, which she had built, as well as of the Monasteries of Saint John Zlataust and Cet£fuia. She also appears to have intervened in matters of state. Taking advantage of her position, she claimed without any legal basis lands that had belonged to Eustratie Dabija and her mother and which had been inherited by her late sister. After a reign which lasted only two and a half years, Constantin Duca was deposed and the family left again for Constantinople. In the summer of 1700, Princess Anastasia was in Constantinople from where, together with three of her children, she wrote to the Austrian Emperor Leopold I, asking him to order the return from Transylvania of the money she had raised as ransom for Prince Duca. This is the last written source documenting her life. There is no evidence of
369
her presence in Moldavia during Constantin’s second reign (1700-1703). She probably died in Constantinople and is buried there.
Starting with the latter half of the sixteenth and throughout the seventeenth century, documentary sources in the archives of the Moldavian capital city list increasing numbers of women whose names are accompanied by names of trades and occupations, such as, to cite only a few, pitdrifa domneasca, carciumdrifa, vinarsarifa, berarifa, sabierifa, §eldrifa, croitorifa, bacalifa, priscornifd, zugravifa, banarita, talpalarifa. (Maria Magdalena Szekely, 4 Women and trades in seventeenth-century la$i. A group portrait ). It might appear as though at the time women asserted themselves emphatically in the city’s manufacturing and commercial activities, which would not be surprising, given parallel developments in Western Europe. However, the genealogical methods required by the nature of the available sources have shown that some of the women designated by terms such as the ones cited above were in fact the wives of men who practised those trades. Linguistically, the suffix -ifa can indicate either a woman who practices a trade or one who is married to an artisan, clerk or merchant. Therefore, only specialized research could in the future establish the actual status of women who appear to have practised professions normally reserved for men such as: barber, farrier, bath attendant, soap-maker, cobbler or draper.
The developmental lag between the Romanian Principalities and Western Europe means that Romanian women emerged in the labour market later, at a time when in the West women were in fact retreating back into the domestic sphere. Information on the existence of a cottage industry is totally absent in Moldavian documents, although the institution itself must have existed. Likewise, one cannot speak of an economic decline or occupational restrictions for women in the sixteenth century because sources documenting their participation in the trades in Ia§i are not available prior to the latter half of that century. Data such as, for example, the level of wages, are simply not available.
The extent to which Romanian women were admitted into guilds is an open-ended issue in historical studies. The main producers and retailers of goods in the Moldavian capital city remained the men for the entire seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, which suggests an enduring entrenchment of the gendered division of labour. The documents we have seen do not offer any information on the possibility of a woman becoming the head of a guild.
The sample under study here comprises professions which, at least in terms of the physical strength required, were suitable for women: bread-making, retailing, the selling - and possibly also the brewing - of alcoholic beverages, dress-making, baking the Eucharist bread. In time, the range of these occupations expanded. After the mid-eighteenth century, documents mention women employed in domestic service - although this must have been a much earlier reality - and especially those who worked at the Hospital of Saint Spiridon. These women came from the poorest sections of the city’s population. Single, old and lacking resources, they had to offer their services for a small wage, a pair of shoes or an exemption from tax. Comparatively, their seventeenth-century counterparts were women of some substance. They owned shops or houses, they were involved in real estate transactions and in money-lending activities.
Although largely illiterate, working women made an active contribution to public life. They were looked upon with respect as persons with authority, they could be called upon as witnesses in court, either on their own, or accompanied by their sons. Naturally, the social acceptance of women who earned their living had to overcome certain barriers, especially the resistance of the Orthodox Church, which was less tolerant in this respect than the Catholic Church and than the various Protestant denominations. Some, if not most, of the working women in seventeenth-century Ia§i appear to have been widows when first listed in trade registers. It is not possible to establish, however, whether they had exercised that occupation while their husbands were still alive, possibly as assistants, or whether they were constrained to take up paid work after their spouses’ death.
The city’s eighteenth-century sources indicate that some of the working women were of foreign origin or non-Christians. By analogy, one could look to the previous century in order to try and establish what proportion of the women in trades was of foreign extraction or were married to foreigners.
Analogies with the eighteenth century suggest that, unlike their West-European counterparts, women who engaged in trades in seventeenth-century Moldavia were valued as respectable members of the community. Their orientation towards paid occupations suggests an increasing specialization of labour and is linked to the growth of cities as centres of manufacturing and consumption. This was a
370
society in flux which needed to make full use of the productive capacities of its members. These changes in the patterns of labour occurred much earlier than the mid-nineteenth-century emancipation of the Gypsy slaves, so cannot be explained solely through the necessity of finding a substitute, or a cheaper source of unspecialized labour. The specific sectors of activity were similar to those of women in Western Europe at the time and were situated mainly in the food industry and in retailing. Unlike Western Europe, however, the Romanian Principalities did not have silk or lace-making industries and therefore, the third specifically feminine area of work, the textile industry, remained under-developed, with the exception of seamstresses.
In seventeenth-century Ia§i, the shift of female activity from the private to the public sphere presupposed a transition from feudal economic and mental structures towards capitalist forms of production and mentalities. Women’s engagement with the city’s economic life, albeit limited and random, the specialization and the recognition of their work as valuable are all indicators of modernity. Therefore, the study of feminine labour in this period could prove to be a fruitful angle for a reconsideration of the onset of modernity in the Romanian Principalities. The study of women’s increasing visibility in the previously male-dominated public sphere might also re-open the debate around the vexed question of the birth date of the Romanian bourgeoisie.
Two of the life histories included in this volume, that of Sara Bulcesti and of Maria Mamucca della Torre-Kalnoky (Violeta Barbu, 6Maria Mamucca della Torre-Kalnoky: a countess at the crossroads of empires *; Tiidos Kinga, Violeta Barbu, *A Lady for new times: Sara Bulcesti-Szekely-Haller), are examined from a trans-cultural perspective. Both lived in and constructed their identit(ies) in a number of different cultural spaces during their lives. Sara Bulcesti was very much a woman of her time in mid- and late seventeenth-century Transylvania, but she was also a forward-looking, original character open to novelty. She was bom south of the Carpathians, some time between 1653 and 1655, to an ethnic Romanian boyar, Papa Buicescu, and his wife, the Transylvanian noblewoman Szalanczi Anna. Married twice, the first time to the nobleman Szekely Laszlo and the second to Haller Istvan II, royal councillor of Transylvania, Sara Bulcesti stood out as an active and generous patron of the Reformed Church and of the arts. When her obituarists called her a ‘holy lady’ they acknowledged various acts of generosity,
from the support she gave to the Reformed Colleges in Cluj and Ora§tie to her donations for the repair of the Reformed Church in Cluj and the repurchase of the master printer Kis Miklos’ workshop from its later owner, the General Consistory of the Reformed Church. An enterprising and tenacious administrator, Sara Bulcesti successfully managed large estates spanning two provinces (Wallachia and Transylvania), went to court if necessary to safeguard this patrimony, all the while looking after lands and serfs, water mills and households. A skilled pre-capitalist entrepreneur, Sara Bulcesti practised the moral values and economic principles of Calvinism: she saved, she loaned money to major elite figures and even to the province’s government in order to enhance the family capital, she mortgaged lands to secure investment capital, she maintained business accounts and correspondence and cultivated political relations with the country’s leading statesmen.
At her home in Cluj and in her country manors, she looked after her two husbands, gave birth to and educated two sons, kept busy with needlework and embroidery, purchased silverware, issued orders to servants, and involved herself in poor relief activities. Bom to a Romanian Eastern Orthodox father and a Reformed Hungarian mother, she took a Catholic as a second husband. It is therefore difficult not to see in her a positive and energetic emblem of Transylvania’s religious, ethnic and cultural diversity. However, she lived and died as a devout member of the Reformed church, attached to her heritage, family and wealth and upholding spiritual values which in her turn she left as a legacy, as shown in the lengthy and detailed testament drawn up in 1696 after the death of her first husband. In accordance with the protestant work ethic of the European urban elites in the pre-capitalist period, she augmented the family wealth with great skill and thriftiness, but also in a spirit of charitable moderation. In this respect, Sara Bulcesti was to a great extent a woman of her time, with her time’s clear-cut hierarchies and firm convictions, yet bold enough to distance herself from this rich tradition and explore new avenues. At the same time, her life was moulded by the ethnic and confessional diversity of her background, on which she drew for highly profitable insertion strategies which she exploited to the full.
371
The life of the Catholic countess Maria Mammuca della Torre, who was bom in Constantinople in 1678 and died in Bucharest in 1749, could not be more different. Her life was shaped by the sociological ambiguities engendered by geographical mobility across generations: her Italian ancestors settled early in Genoese colonies in the Levant and the Balkans (Istria), later to become subjects of the Ottoman Porte and diplomats in the service of West-European powers. Later still, members of the family took up residence in Bucharest, Vienna and Trieste. A case study of two generations of the Genoese family Mamucca della Torre follows the life journeys of these Levantine diplomats who negotiated loyalties and privileges across imperial boundaries in accordance with personal interests and the opportunities available to them in the pre-modem and early modem world. At the centre of this case study is the biography of Countess Maria Mamucca della Torre, who was first married to the Hungarian (Szeckler) Count Adam Kalnoky and subsequently to the Wallachian top-rank boyar Costin Neniul.
The study of her biography has drawn on two major sources. The more important one is the correspondence she pursued in the last years of her life with her sons, which is unique for early eighteenth-century Romania. The second is the diary kept by her eldest son, Antal K lnoky who became a general in the Habsburg army. Maria Mammuca della Torre’s letters express the anguish of a woman trying to build bridges, via the medium of the written letter, across the voids created in her life: the separation from her blood family, dispersed among Constantinople, Vienna and Italy, as well as from her eight children, left in Transylvania when she decided to settle in the Wallachian capital, Bucharest. While the correspondence focuses on the individual drama of loneliness and otherness, there are references, too, to the period’s political events: the annexation of Transylvania by the Habsburg troops, the Kuruc rebellion led by Francis Rakoczy in 1695-1705, and the Austro-Ottoman wars waged on the territories of Wallachia and Moldavia between 1739 and 1742. The letters, with their dramatic mix of guilt shot through with mystical, fatalistic and occasionally bigoted accents, reflect a particular way of experiencing motherhood.
In many respects, the biography of Countess della Torre is revealing of a particular type of trans-imperial cultural mediation, spanning the Italian colonies of the Levant, the Szeckler regions of Transylvania and the Romanian Principalities, in the capitals of which Maria Mamucca della Torre lived with her youngest son, Joseph. Her case is equally interesting for the insights it offers into the role of the Romanian provinces and of Transylvania - as colonial peripheries - within the network of communications established almost a century earlier between the Ottoman and the Habsburg Empires.
The portrait of the Princess Elina Cantacuzino (Violeta Barbu, ‘Elina Cantacuzino: a lady of «great beauty in body and in soul») continues the theme of geographical and cultural mobility illustrated by the two above-mentioned figures. The daughter of Wallachia’s ruling prince Radu §erban (1602-1611), Lady (Doamna) Elina was bom in 1611 in Ia§i, the Moldavian capital city, where her father had taken refuge with family, courtiers and army. Over the following nine years, she lived in exile in the Moravian citadels Modor and Tumau and, for a short while, in Vienna. Political vagaries sent her into exile several times in her long and eventful life, to Transylvania, Moldavia, Constantinople and to the island of Crete, before she died in 1687. When direct testimonies are lacking, a woman’s life may be deemed worthy of a biography when her access to power and her symbolic capital are recognized as legitimate and can be shown to have given her an ascendancy over contemporary male power-holders. Elina Cantacuzino was one such woman. When her husband, the grand postelnik Constantin Cantacuzino - the founder of the Wallachian Cantacuzino clan - was executed in 1667, she became the acknowledged head of the family. She ruled over the family, and managed a huge patrimony comprising over eighty villages, with an iron fist. The significant wealth she inherited was subsequently handed down the generations via a female line: her sole inheritors, the ladies (jupanife) Maria and Anca of Coiani, descendants of the Craiovescu clan, which produced two ruling princes in Wallachia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
For two decades, as the Cantacuzena domus was assailed by conflict and persecutions from rival clans and their patrons, Elina Cantacuzino helped maintain family solidarity and unity. This period of turmoil ended when one of her sons, §erban Cantacuzino (r. 1679-1688), gained the Wallachian throne. Mindful of the antiquity and nobility of her princely lineage, as well as of the imperial origins of the Cantacuzinos, Elina fought for harmony and equity within the clan. Her testaments show that she pursued patrimonial strategies, such as the undivided co-ownership of the family estate by her six sons, which clearly put the power of the clan before the individual interests of
372
its members. This daughter and mother of princes was the first woman in the Romanian old regime to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 1668. At the end of the political trial of those responsible for her husband’s death, Elina Cantacuzino, who had been instrumental in prosecuting the defendants, gave an example of Christian charity when she also pardoned them. She made a decisive contribution to promoting social cohesion by mending bridges between the rival clans vying for power in Wallachia in the decade between 1670 and 1680.
Alongside this case study of a woman participating in a political trial, the present volume includes an overview by Violeta Barbu of women’s access to justice in seventeenth-century Wallachia. The main objective of the research undertaken for this essay (‘Ladies and commoners in search of justice*) was to gain a clearer understanding of women’s capacity to actually use the legal rights they were entitled to irrespective of class. Such rights were guaranteed in the Byzantine juridical tradition as opposed the West-European tradition where the received Romano-Byzantine law operated in constant competition with the national legal systems. On the basis of a serial body of documents, chiefly comprising legal decisions of an administrative nature, Violeta Barbu analyzes women’s right to make court appearances, to institute legal proceedings, to defend themselves, to act as witnesses and swear an oath. She also looks at the extent to which there was a gender bias within the legal system. The author resorts to the basic distinction between legal norm and the exceptions and innovations arising from juridical practices in order to highlight different types of behaviours among the women resorting to justice and the attitudes of the courts towards them. A number of case studies allowed Violeta Barbu to study the dynamics of norms and practices and the chances women had of bypassing the normative prescriptions of the law to gain a favourable outcome. These case studies were compared to a large sample of legal categories as illustrated in the corpuses of internal documents (1600-1656 and 1688-1714).
In the seventeenth century, Wallachian women enjoyed full legal rights if they were widowed or unmarried. Married women could appear in court alongside their husbands or were represented by them in cases where the object of the litigation was related to their dowry and where mother-in-law and son-in-law were co-plaintiffs. Their legal competencies as heirs, testators, donors or sellers-purchasers only pertained to their own assets. Once they were widowed, however, they enjoyed the same civil legal rights as men.
In the first instance, the research covered criminal offences: murder, theft, defamation, forgery, fraud. It is the view of this author that the legal system was fairly bias-free in terms of gender and that in fact sentences were often more lenient when the defendants were women. Unlike Western Europe, the Romanian culture of the time was comparatively free of the gender stereotypes which saw women as subversive forces undermining society and therefore the sentences passed were not subject to such distortions.
In civil court cases, women could be cited as witnesses for other women, for their husbands and close kin, as well as - especially in the first decades of the seventeenth century - for third parties. The subsequent decline in their capacity to act as witnesses for third parties can only be explained perhaps as an alignment of old-regime Romanian society with the gender-biased pre-modem Western juridical systems. For the first half of the seventeenth century, the research also uncovered instances of collective witnessing. These situations, which involved groups of six or twelve women jurors bearing witness on behalf of women defendants, were exceptional.
From the multicultural and multi-confessional world of seventeenth-century Transylvania, Kinga S. Tudos selected two life histories of elite women: Countess Erzsebet Kalnoki { Loyal to the Szeckler heritage: Lazar Erzsebet, Count Kalnoki’s lady *) and Countess Mindszenti Krisztina (‘Duty and love: Mindszenti Krisztina, Countess Csdki ). L zar Erzsebet came from one of the top-echelon noble families of late seventeenth-century Transylvania. Unexceptional otherwise, her profile and life corresponded entirely to the model of the ideal wife adopted by the Transylvanian nobility. Unlike her contemporary Sara Bulcesti, who was remarkable for her capacity to embrace novelty, Lazar Erzsebet had a drama-free and, one might say, an undistinguished life, safely anchored in tradition and custom. Yet, as Kinga S. Tudos shows, this life has its own interest and exemplaiy value. As a resident of Szecklerland (or Szekely Land), her biography offers the historian a gateway into the study of the elite society of eastern Transylvania. Granted autonomy privileges by the mling princes of Transylvania in exchange for military duties in the defence of the Eastern Carpathian border, over the
373
centuries Szecklerland developed its own customary law and a lifestyle which differed to some extent from that of the rest of the principality. Lâzâr Erzsébet’s life offers insights into these traditions and into a specifically Szeckler way of life, which she upheld and transmitted down the family line. The descendant of a major elite family, Erzsébet was bom in the family’s castle at Làzarea, built in the fifteenth century by the family founder. As the daughter of Lâzâr Istvân V, first royal judge (judex régis) of Scaunul (.sedes) Ciuc, she received a strict education in a Catholic home at a time when the Catholic faith was in a minority in Reformation Transylvania. She spent most of her time as a young married woman supervising the building of the castles at Valea Criçurilor and Miclâuçoara, while her husband was away on state duties. During the day, she would toil endlessly, running the household, planting gardens, bringing up four daughters and a son. After sunset, she spent the evenings writing long letters to her far-away husband, at one time in post in Vienna as Transylvanian vice-chancellor.
More importantly, Erzsébet was able to circulate the values she believed in amongst her circle and transmit the material and spiritual heritage of her ancestors down the family line. Her correspondence with her daughters and the inventories of her home at Valea Criçurilor were important sources which helped reconstruct her domestic world with its furniture, personal belongings and general ambience. She cultivated aromatic and medicinal herbs and selected seeds for herbal remedies which she used to treat her children and servants. This study reconstructs in detail the material world of a Szeckler noble house and of the gardens which Countess Lâzâr Erzsébet administered with consummate skill. The correspondence she pursued with her husband and daughters adds the human and emotional dimension to this depiction of the material environment in which she lived.
On a different note, Countess Mindszenti Krisztina appears as the heroine of a story of love and devotion. Krisztina’s personality and life were reconstructed almost exclusively on the basis of the intersecting discourses of her two husbands. The first was Erdélyi Istvân, president of the princely appellate court and Governor (Rom. comité, Lat. comes) of Turda. The second was the adventurous and handsome Count Csâky Istvân, famous for being at one time the lover of Katharina von Brandenburg, Princess of Transylvania. The pages of the four testaments left behind by Erdélyi Istvân, an elderly, ailing husband, depict Krisztina as a devoted, dutiful and submissive wife, ready to sacrifice herself for her husband’s well-being. Endowed with this impeccable reputation, she was courted by the charming Count Csaki who, at the age of forty was widowed for a second time and was regarded in society as a real catch. This second marriage was an awakening for the young widow, who was still wearing mourning clothes.
Csâky Istvân’s letters to his fiancée - later his wife - reveal a secretive and enduring love story. The two had met and declared their feelings for each other when very young, but their destinies had followed divergent paths. They were to be reunited later when both were widowed in their prime. Their exchange of letters shows a youthful passion which time and separation had not extinguished. As Krisztina was about to leave Transylvania to join her betrothed at the castle of Szepesvar (Spissky-Zâmek, in today’s Slovakia), Count Csaki’s epistles brimmed over with an erotic charge which defied the period’s norms of religious and social restraint. Krisztina Mindszenti’s two marriages appear as two facets of the conjugal relationship in the old regime: the first was in the mediaeval tradition of submission and service to a much older spouse, while the second was in phase with the pre-modem, seventeenth-century West-European ethos of mutual affection, erotic attraction and enduring passion as the true foundations of a married couple’s life together. Moreover, this woman’s biography reflects a cultural revolution in the ways the private space of the conjugal home is imagined and organized. In his letters, her passionate husband gave precise instructions on how the couple’s bedroom was to be furnished and arranged. This is no longer simply the re-imagining of a woman’s room or domain, as was the case with Countess Lazar’s domestic dominion, but the emergence of a space of intimacy as an emblem of a radical change in mores. Full of eloquent innuendoes, Count Csaki’s letters also hinted at a male construction of the female body. With a courtier’s attention to fashion, adornment and elegance, Csaki affectionately advised his wife on the fabrics and designs which would have suited her best, and picked the most sought-after Viennese dressmakers for her.
The collective portrait devoted to the Transylvanian ladies who cultivated their gardens CLadies and their garden in Szecklerland*) focuses on a new feminine pursuit which emerged with the spread of the new fashionable taste for gardens and parks in Transylvania in the baroque age. In the mediaeval period, one of the cardinal virtues of a wife, whether noblewoman or commoner, was
374
to be able to run her household competently. Then, this role was limited to the house itself, with an emphasis on keeping the house clean, on kitchen duties, the education of children and the supervision of servants. Things evolved and, by the seventeenth century, a good housewife had to look after a kitchen garden and an ornamental garden, both indispensable elements in the new type of home. Conduct books and practical prescriptive guides appeared, one of the most influential of which was Apaczai Csere Janos’s Magyar Encyclopaedia (1653). This included guidelines on how to organize a kitchen garden, how to collect seeds and plant seedlings, etc. Whether they were multi or singleculture, seventeenth-century gardens were modelled on the mediaeval monastery gardens which included plots for aromatic and medicinal herbs (herbalurius) and distinct sections for growing vegetables (hortus). Tending such gardens required specific skills, given their practical uses. However, the gardening ladies of seventeenth-century Transylvania were not content simply with putting fresh fruit and vegetables on their dinner tables or having a steady supply of herbal remedies. Quite often, they proudly showed off large ornamental gardens and orchards situated in adjacent position to their manors. Aesthetic values played an increasingly important role: flower species were picked according to the trend of the moment, and seedlings were often imported from as far as Holland.
The spacious parks with rare species of trees, statuary and fountains were a thing of the future: they only appeared next to Transylvanian castles in the eighteenth century. Drawing on manor inventories (urbaria) and on the private correspondence between ladies and their husbands, Kinga S. Tüdôs’s study reveals the importance of gardens in the lives of the noble housewives and in the domestic economy of noble houses. These gardens were women’s exclusive domain and arguably, they were often perceived as extensions of the home and mirrors of the manor lady’s skill and refmement.
The three feminine portraits from nineteenth-century Wallachia and Moldavia focus on a very specific life experience: displacement and exile. As some of the other studies in this volume show, the political uncertainties of seventeenth-century East-Central Europe displaced many elite women once their powerful husbands or male kin were disgraced or died. The twice-widowed Moldavian lady Todosia (Maria Magdalena Székely, Portrait of a lady with a pendant Todosia Nicorifoaia ) lived for many years and finally died in Poland when her family fell victim to rival political claimants. In similar circumstances, Anastasia Duca and Dafina Dabija, wives of ruling princes of Moldavia, had to seek a safe haven in Constantinople, the capital of the suzerain power, at least once in the course of their tumultuous lifetimes (Maria Magdalena Székely, ‘Portrait of a lady with a lover. Anastasia Duca* and 4Portrait of a lady without a portrait Ecaterina-Dafina Dabija’). While in exile, all three women were busy ‘networking’ and seeking political allies in order to secure the return to power or the mere survival of their own clans.
Violeta Barbu’s portrait of the Countess Maria Mammucca della Torre (1678-1749) illustrates the related theme of estrangement resulting from a multi-national and multi-cultural background. Della Torre’s letters reveal the emotional anguish caused by separation in a family life spanning the Italian colonies of the Levant, the Szeckler regions of Transylvania and the capital cities of the two Romanian Principalities.
It might appear at first sight that the life experiences of the three nineteenth-century women included in this volume do not add anything substantially new to the theme of estrangement, displacement and exile. Maria Rosetti (b. Marie Grant in Guernsey, 1819-1893), Hermione Quinet (Ermiona Asachi, bom in Vienna, 1821-1900), and Dora dTstria (b. Elena Ghica in Bucharest, 1828-1888) had multi-ethnic backgrounds, travelled or were displaced and suffered the pain of separation and estrangement from native country, spouses and children, much like their seventeenth-century counterparts. Yet, as Angela Jianu’s essays ( Dora d’Istria: a gift made to Europe Ermiona Asachi-Quinet and the ,, republic of intelligences ” *; ‘Maria Rosetti: love and exile *) in this volume show, there are important differences. Two of them, Hermione Quinet and Dora dTstria, were writers in their own right who left considerable bodies of work which articulated their experiences of temporary or permanent displacement. Apart from a short span as a journalist in the 1870s, Maria Rosetti remained largely in the shadow of her more famous husband, the Romanian forty-eighter, writer, politician and founder of the Liberal Party, C. A. Rosetti. Yet, she left a significant correspondence which shows the ways in which she positioned herself vis-à-vis her adoptive homeland, Romania, and the ways in which she experienced exile daily during the Rosettis’ decade-long exile in Paris in the aftermath of the crushed revolution of 1848. Their correspondence, pursued, mostly in French, from
375
1846 to 1883, must rank as one of the most interesting husband-and-wife exchanges of letters in European culture and was made available to the general public by the late Marin Bucur in a two-volume edition. The letters were an important channel of communication especially because the Rosettis lived apart, on and off, for longer than twenty years.
Of the three, only Dora dTstria was the descendant of an old elite family, the Ghikas (who were of Albanian origin), and, through her father and uncle, was close to the Wallachian centres of power. Hermione Quinet and Maria Rosetti are examples of middle-class and professional urbanites caught up in the political turmoil of mid-nmeteenth-century Romania and France by association with their husbands activities. This raises the question whether, by the mid-centuiy, (political) exile was becoming a more generalized experience rather than one affecting ruling and aristocratic families only, as seems to be largely the case in the old regime.
But were these women political exiles in the proper sense of the term? While still in Romania, the young Elena Ghika (the future dTstria) married the son of an old family of the Russian nobility, Prince Koltsov-Massalsky. It was a free choice, but the marriage proved unhappy and the political climate in St. Petersburg uncongenial for a woman with liberal inclinations. Like Germaine de Staël and the painter Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun in Napoleonic France, dTstria took the unconventional step of opting out of the marriage and living the life of the independent, free-thinking artist as a single woman. Her exploits as alpinist, traveller and historian are recounted with self-promoting flair in her prolific output as well as in the press coverage of the time. She lived in Switzerland and finally settled in Italy, where she died, in Florence, at the age of sixty. While remaining discreet on the short period she spent in the Russia of Nicholas I, in her works she copiously covers Romania, Albania and Greece, the various ‘homelands with which she maintained lifelong and unaltered affective and cultural affinities. Hers was the freely-chosen life of the nomadic, independent thinker rather than that of persecuted, hunted and dispossessed exiles such as the Rosetti and the Quinet couples. She was also fmancially-independent and secure as a ‘celebrity’ in her own time, a sense of security which is reflected in her unhurried, rather self-conscious writing style and the leisurely, egalitarian and pan-European thematic coverage of her works. She remained devoted to the Ghika dynasty and, as a moderately liberal monarchist, she constantly promoted the family’s chances of offering a ruling prince to the embattled Romanian Principalities, caught between Ottoman suzerainty and Russian influence.
In contrast to dTstria, both Maria Rosetti and Hermione Quinet followed their husbands into what was definitely categorized as ‘political’ exile even at the time. Both made the choice freely and consequently suffered long periods of marginalization and financial distress, all spelled out in their correspondence. Of the two, the wife of the French republican historian was a double exile: willingly, from her native Romania, which she ‘repudiated’ for the rest of her life, and, under coercion, from the political regime of Second-Empire France, a regime which her republican circles regarded as a temporary and ignominious lapse in an otherwise glorious national history. Maria Rosetti returned to Romania in 1857 and remained her husband’s loyal companion in the political turmoil which accompanied the re-birth of the country as a modem nation.
One particular feature distinguishes these nineteenth-century women’s exile as a ‘modem’ type of exile: the expansion of the European press and their use of increased publishing opportunities in the promotion of political and cultural causes. In France, the radical liberal circles of the Rosettis and their associates allocated an important part of the diaspora s budget to an insistent press campaign in favour of the unification and autonomy of their captive land, especially around the Congress of Paris (1856). They also ‘hired’ the pens of important French intellectuals such as Jules Michelet, Edgar Quinet and Paul Bataillard in support of this cause. The publicity campaign surrounding, for instance, the serialization in the French periodical Le Siècle of Jules Michelet’s text ‘Madame Rosetti’ (1853) was a collaborative Franco-Romanian enterprise with a double objective. In France, it was meant to disseminate information on Romania as France’s Tittle Latin sister’ and her struggle for independent nationhood. In Romania, such texts, often smuggled in under surveillance by the Habsburg secret police, were meant to maintain alive the ideal of a united, and ideally, a republican future nation. The memorialisation of Maria Rosetti in Michelet’s national-romantic text and in
C. D. Rosenthal’s 1850 portrait of her as ‘revolutionary Romania’ also created a feminine, Marianne-like emblem for the embattled Romanian lands.
376
In their writings, d’Istria and Hermione Quinet promoted the cause of women’s education within the broader European ‘knowledge wars’ and the contemporary debates around women’s rights and roles. Neither was a feminist and neither proposed a radical overhaul of gender hierarchies, opting instead for a gradualist integration of women in the polity via education and via the establishment of a ‘democracy of intelligences’. After the death of her only son, Hermione Quinet was significantly involved in the private education of children of the French republican proscrits, thus making an important contribution to the training of the Third Republic’s future republican ‘cadres’. Although largely forgotten until recently, Dora d’lstria’s works on the history of women (Les femmes en Orient, 1859-1860, and Des femmes par une femme, 1865) were arguably the first to put the women of East-Central Europe and the Balkans on the map of European historiography.
Angela Jianu’s summative essay ‘ Women in exile: space, time, texf reviews the ways in which the three nineteenth-century feminine figures selected for this volume were united in a number of common cultural-political missions which were arguably strengthened rather than hindered by exile and estrangement.
Translated from the Romanian by ANGELA JIANU
377
CUPRINS
Cuvânt-înainte ....................................................................... 5
I. MOLDOVA, sec. XVII (Maria Magdalena Székely)
1. Portret de jupâneasâ cu pandantiv. Todosia Nicorifoaia...................... 9
2. Portret de doamnä färä de portret. Ecaterina-Dafina Dabija.................. 25
3. Portret de doamnä cu ibovnic. Anastasia Duca ............................... 45
4. Portret de grup. Femei cu meserii ín Ia§ii veacului al XVII-lea............. 73
Ilustratii
II. TARA ROMÂNEASCA, sec. XVII-XVIII (Violeta Barbu)
5. Elina Cantacuzino: Doamna „prea frumoasa la süßet §i la trup ”.............. 97
6. Maria Mamucca della Torre Kálnoky: contesa de la fruntariile imperiilor..... 149
7. Femei, jupánese §i doamne ín cäutarea dreptafii............................. 187
Ilustratii
III. TRANSILVANIA, sec. XVII-XVIII (Kinga S. Tüdds)
8. O doamnä pentru vremuri no i: Sara Bulcesti-Székely-Haller (Kinga S. Tüdös §i
Violeta Barbu).................................................................. 241
9. Fidelitatea mo§tenirii secuieçîi: Lázár Erzsébet, doamna contelui Kálnoky .. 269
10. Datorie §i iubire: Mindszenti Krisztina, contesa Csáki .................... 291
11. Doamnele gospodine din Jinutul Secuiesc §i grädinile lor................... 321
Ilustratii
IV. PRINCIPATELE ROMÂNE, sec. XIX {Angela Jianu)
12. Dora dTstria: un dar JacutEuropei ......................................... 331
13. Ermiona AsachUQuinet §i „ república inteligenfelor ”....................... 339
14. Maria Rosetti: iubire ?i exil.................................................. 349
15. Femei ín exil: spafiu, timp, text ............................................. 357
Ilustratii
Abstract........................................................................... 365
Abrevien bibliografice ............................................................ 379
381
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Barbu, Violeta 1957-2018 Székely, Maria Magdalena Tüdős, S. Kinga Jianu, Angela |
| author_GND | (DE-588)1084357348 |
| author_facet | Barbu, Violeta 1957-2018 Székely, Maria Magdalena Tüdős, S. Kinga Jianu, Angela |
| author_role | aut aut aut aut |
| author_sort | Barbu, Violeta 1957-2018 |
| author_variant | v b vb m m s mm mms s k t sk skt a j aj |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV043468404 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)953103449 (DE-599)OBVAC13012359 |
| era | Geschichte 1600-1900 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1600-1900 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02704nam a2200553 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV043468404</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20160426 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t|</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160318s2015 xx agcl |||| 00||| rum d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789732725078</subfield><subfield code="9">978-973-27-2507-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)953103449</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)OBVAC13012359</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">rum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-Re13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Barbu, Violeta</subfield><subfield code="d">1957-2018</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1084357348</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Grǎdina rozelor</subfield><subfield code="b">femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania</subfield><subfield code="c">Violeta Barbu, Maria Magdalena Székely, Kinga S. Tüdős, Angela Jianu</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Le jardin des roses</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">A garden of roses</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Bucureşti</subfield><subfield code="b">Editura Academiei Române</subfield><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">381 Seiten, 12 ungezählte Seiten Bildtafeln</subfield><subfield code="b">Illustrationen, Notenbeispiel, Porträts</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="546" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Englische Zusammenfassung</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1600-1900</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Moldau</subfield><subfield code="g">Fürstentum</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4039965-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Walachei</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4118956-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Siebenbürgen</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4054835-1</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Siebenbürgen</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4054835-1</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Moldau</subfield><subfield code="g">Fürstentum</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4039965-5</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Walachei</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4118956-5</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1600-1900</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Székely, Maria Magdalena</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tüdős, S. Kinga</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jianu, Angela</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">305.309</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">439</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">306.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">439</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">306.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">305.309</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">929</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">439</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">929</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">0903</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028885480</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Moldau Fürstentum (DE-588)4039965-5 gnd Walachei (DE-588)4118956-5 gnd Siebenbürgen (DE-588)4054835-1 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Moldau Fürstentum Walachei Siebenbürgen |
| id | DE-604.BV043468404 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-12-20T17:37:09Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789732725078 |
| language | Romanian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028885480 |
| oclc_num | 953103449 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| physical | 381 Seiten, 12 ungezählte Seiten Bildtafeln Illustrationen, Notenbeispiel, Porträts |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publishDateSearch | 2015 |
| publishDateSort | 2015 |
| publisher | Editura Academiei Române |
| record_format | marc |
| spellingShingle | Barbu, Violeta 1957-2018 Székely, Maria Magdalena Tüdős, S. Kinga Jianu, Angela Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4039965-5 (DE-588)4118956-5 (DE-588)4054835-1 |
| title | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |
| title_alt | Le jardin des roses A garden of roses |
| title_auth | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |
| title_exact_search | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |
| title_full | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania Violeta Barbu, Maria Magdalena Székely, Kinga S. Tüdős, Angela Jianu |
| title_fullStr | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania Violeta Barbu, Maria Magdalena Székely, Kinga S. Tüdős, Angela Jianu |
| title_full_unstemmed | Grǎdina rozelor femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania Violeta Barbu, Maria Magdalena Székely, Kinga S. Tüdős, Angela Jianu |
| title_short | Grǎdina rozelor |
| title_sort | gradina rozelor femei din moldova tara romaneasca si transilvania sec xvii xix le jardin des roses femmes de moldavie valachie et transylvanie xviie xixe siecle a garden of roses women from the romanian principalities and transylvania |
| title_sub | femei din Moldova, Ţara Româneascǎ şi Transilvania (sec. XVII-XIX) = Le jardin des roses : femmes de Moldavie, Valachie et Transylvanie (XVIIe-XIXe siècle) = A garden of roses : women from the Romanian Principalities and Transylvania |
| topic_facet | Moldau Fürstentum Walachei Siebenbürgen |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028885480&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT barbuvioleta gradinarozelorfemeidinmoldovatararomaneascasitransilvaniasecxviixixlejardindesrosesfemmesdemoldavievalachieettransylvaniexviiexixesiecleagardenofroseswomenfromtheromanianprincipalitiesandtransylvania AT szekelymariamagdalena gradinarozelorfemeidinmoldovatararomaneascasitransilvaniasecxviixixlejardindesrosesfemmesdemoldavievalachieettransylvaniexviiexixesiecleagardenofroseswomenfromtheromanianprincipalitiesandtransylvania AT tudosskinga gradinarozelorfemeidinmoldovatararomaneascasitransilvaniasecxviixixlejardindesrosesfemmesdemoldavievalachieettransylvaniexviiexixesiecleagardenofroseswomenfromtheromanianprincipalitiesandtransylvania AT jianuangela gradinarozelorfemeidinmoldovatararomaneascasitransilvaniasecxviixixlejardindesrosesfemmesdemoldavievalachieettransylvaniexviiexixesiecleagardenofroseswomenfromtheromanianprincipalitiesandtransylvania AT barbuvioleta lejardindesroses AT szekelymariamagdalena lejardindesroses AT tudosskinga lejardindesroses AT jianuangela lejardindesroses AT barbuvioleta agardenofroses AT szekelymariamagdalena agardenofroses AT tudosskinga agardenofroses AT jianuangela agardenofroses |