12.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 6 refers to the self-identification of <strong>Hungarian</strong>s in Romania.The authors of Ethnobarometer formulated a list of phrases referring togeographical-cultural differences. The option of being simply “<strong>Hungarian</strong>”was eluded.TABLE 6. Self-identification of <strong>Hungarian</strong>s.<strong>Nation</strong>hood <strong>and</strong> IdentityIdentityPercentage<strong>Hungarian</strong> from Romania 15.2%Transylvanian <strong>Hungarian</strong> 53.0%<strong>Hungarian</strong> of <strong>Romanian</strong> citizenship 15.8%Szekler 12.9%Other 3.1%TOTAL 100%Source: Culic, Horváth, <strong>and</strong> Lazãr, Ethnobarometer: Interethnic Relations in Romania.Data for the <strong>Hungarian</strong> sample, N=798.The self-identification of <strong>Hungarian</strong>s indirectly account for theirrelationship with the <strong>Romanian</strong> state, understood as a territorially centralizedset of institutions organizing the activity in – <strong>and</strong> holding monopolyof force over – a territory. According to Table 6, more than half of the<strong>Hungarian</strong>s (53.0%) chose a regional identification, describing themselvesas both <strong>Hungarian</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Transylvanians. In this way, they distinguishedthemselves from the <strong>Hungarian</strong>s in Hungary – asserting that they are“another sort” of <strong>Hungarian</strong>s. 29 Nevertheless, they acknowledged beingpart of the <strong>Hungarian</strong> nation. Regional identification is, to an importantextent, explained by the cultural-historical specificities (including the ethnicdistribution) of the respective area. <strong>Hungarian</strong>s identified themselvesin regional terms to the following degree: 82.6% in Szeklerl<strong>and</strong>, 65.6% inTransylvania (including the Partium), 55.6% in North-West (Criºana,Maramureº), 40% in the Banat. 30 Returning to Table 6, about the samepercentage of the <strong>Hungarian</strong> population chose two “official” or “institutional”definitions: 15.2% of <strong>Hungarian</strong>s identified themselves as “<strong>Hungarian</strong>sfrom Romania,” respectively 15.8% as “<strong>Hungarian</strong>s of <strong>Romanian</strong>citizenship.” Both maintain to be part of the <strong>Hungarian</strong> nation, but inquite different ways. The term “<strong>Hungarian</strong> of <strong>Romanian</strong> citizenship”eludes the regional (Transylvanian) identification <strong>and</strong> stresses theunequivocal identification with the <strong>Hungarian</strong> nation <strong>and</strong> the attachmentto the people living in the <strong>Hungarian</strong> national state. <strong>Hungarian</strong>s who identifiedthemselves as such do not perceive themselves different from <strong>Hungarian</strong>sin Hungary in any other way than citizenship. The former term,“<strong>Hungarian</strong> from Romania,” is adopted by <strong>Hungarian</strong>s who constructed<strong>and</strong> hold a specific identity, as inhabitants of Romania. They are distinct235

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!