Nation-Building and Contested Identities: Romanian & Hungarian ...

The Idea of Independent Romanian National Economy in Transylvaniaown....We would have our own factories with Romanian workers, they wouldassure us consumer goods and we would not be debtors of everybody anylonger.” S., “Industria noastrã de casã” (Our home industry), Revista Economicã1 (10 July 1899), p. 291.41 The exhibition was organized “in order to present themselves to those whowere always crying that Romanians had no crafts, no agriculture and no finearts.” See Vasile Vesa, “Aspecte ale activitãþii cultural-politice a burghezieiromâne din Transilvania la sfîrºitul sec. XIX ºi începutul sec. XX” (Someaspects of the cultural-political activites of the Romanian bourgeoisie in Transylvaniaat the end of the 19 th and the beginning of the 20 th century), ActaMusei Napocensis 3 (1966), p. 538.42 Vesa, “Aspecte ale activitãþii cultural-politice a burgheziei române din Transilvania,”pp. 539 and 541.43 Vesa, “Aspecte ale activitãþii cultural-politice a burgheziei române din Transilvania,”p. 542.44 These exhibitions – besides the “national” ones, many others were organizedby the Romanian Agricultural Association of Szeben county, by the Associationof Romanian Journeymen of Hermannstadt, and by the different women’sassociations – served not only the aim of strenghtening the solidarity of Romaniansliving on the two sides of the Carpathians (in 1905, some two thousandvisitors came from Romania) but, at the same time, to establish closer linksbetween the middle class and the peasantry, hence local committees had to beset up everywhere in order to gather the necessary objects and to organize thetravel to the exhibition. See Vesa, “Aspecte ale activitãþii cultural-politicea burgheziei române din Transilvania,” p. 544.45 Eugenia Glodariu, “Din activitatea editorialã a Astrei: Biblioteca Popularãa Asociaþiunii” (On the editorial activities of the Astra: The Popular Library ofthe Association), Acta Musei Napocensis 8 (1971), p. 312.46 Statistics show that these publications were really popular: for instance, in1912, of 11,852 readers, 9,536 were peasants and 736 craftsmen. On the otherhand, the fragile financial situation of the public is reflected by the fact that, in1913, the number of subscribers dropped to 7664 because of the global overproductioncrisis and rise of taxes. As for the topics of the series, various bookletswere published with belletristic, historical, economic, hygienic, educational,religious, and folkloristic contents. See Glodariu, “Din activitatea editorialãa Astrei,” pp. 314-318.47 See Lajos Kántor, Itt valami más van … Erdélyi krónika (1911-1959) (Here issomething else... Transylvanian chronicle, 1911-1959) (Budapest: HéttoronyKiadó, n.d.), p. 13.48 One could mention here the “Society for Creating a Fund of a Romanian Theatre”that, in 1907, had a fund of some four hundred thousand koronas, givingscholarship grants, announcing competitions for original plays and financingmany performances; or the “Romanian National Cultural Association ofArad” and the similar association in Máramaros (Maramureº). The conpossessoratesof Karánsebes (Caransebeº) and Naszód (Nasãud) also spent significantsums on scholarships. But all these funds were surpassed by the largestprivate fund of Hungary, the Gozsdu Fund (having a property of 6,493,055koronas at the beginning of 1907) supporting orthodox pupils who studied in223