Românul

Contents page of theCalendarulŭ Romanuluialmanac, 1866. Contributors:C. A. Rosetti,Maria Rosetti,Dimitrie Brătianu,Eugeniu Carada andRadu Ionescu (withJustiție și libertate)
Type	political and literary weekly newspaper (daily 1859–1899; bimonthly 1901–1903)
Founder	C. A. Rosetti
Publisher	Vintilă Rosetti (last)
Editor	Constantin Al. Ionescu-Caion (last)
Founded	1857
Ceased publication	1905
Headquarters	Academiei Street 2,Bucharest
OCLC number	472699385

Românul (Romanian pronunciation:[roˈmɨnul], meaning "The Romanian"; originally spelledRomanulu orRomânulŭ, also known asRomînul,Concordia,Libertatea andConsciinti'a Nationala), was a political and literary newspaper published inBucharest,Romania, from 1857 to 1905. Established as the leading voice ofRomanian liberalism (the "Red" faction) in the state ofWallachia, it had direct connections to theradical ideology of Western Europe. Its founder and director was the aristocratC. A. Rosetti, known asRomantic poet,Masonic promoter and left-wing activist, seconded by the brothersIon C. Brătianu andDimitrie Brătianu.Românul's roots were planted in the1848 revolutionary movement, whose press organ,Pruncul Român, was a direct predecessor.

In its first editions,Românul helped circulate the slogans of the national emancipation ideal, and campaigned forMoldavia to join Wallachia in aunion of the principalities, the basis of modern Romania. Although that union was achieved in 1859, Rosetti fell out with the electedDomnitorAlexander John Cuza, censuring his dictatorial inclinations and being in turn censored.Românul men (Rosetti,Eugeniu Carada) helped topple Cuza in February 1866, after whichRomânul became the expression of radicalism in government. During the early rule ofDomnitorCarol, it became noted for bellicose statements favoring the incorporation into Romania ofTransylvania,Bukovina, and other regions held by theAustrian Empire; it also supported Romania's full independence from theOttoman Empire, and the creation of "Red" paramilitary units. This agenda was taken up byBogdan Petriceicu Hasdeu,Alexandru Odobescu, and various otherRomânul writers. Additionally, during brief periods of conflict with Carol,Românul supportedrepublican agitation, most openly so in the troubled year 1870. Its inclinations towardethnic nationalism andantisemitism were additional topics of controversy.

Românul men consolidated the "Red" opposition, creating theNational Liberal Party (PNL), which dominated Romanian politics from 1875 onward.Românul gave enthusiastic backing to theRomanian War of Independence, but was not pleased by the establishment of theRomanian Kingdom. The Rosettists became thefar left of PNL, and hadsocialist sympathies, being identified by theconservative opinion-makers (writersTitu Maiorescu,Mihai Eminescu andIon Luca Caragiale) with excess,demagogy, or corruption. They also ridiculedRomânul for its "macaronic" rendition of theRomanian language.

Românul unwittingly destabilized the PNL by proposing electoral and other reforms during the 1880s, and its leaders, Rosetti included, were pushed into leaving the party. In its final edition, put out byVintilă Rosetti, the openly pro-socialist newspaper went into steady decline.

TheRosetti (Ruset) family, ofGreek-Byzantine andPhanariote origin, joined theMoldo-Wallachian boyar class in the 17th century, experiencing supreme political power with the rise ofAntonie Vodă (1675), and then with the arrival ofManolache-Giani Vodă (1770).^[1] TheRomânul founder was a collateral descendant of Antonie,^[2] and, despite being identified with Wallachia's liberal school, had a mainly Moldavian ancestry.^[3] By the time of his revolutionary debut, the various Rosetti branches populated the entire political landscape of the two principalities.^[4] Although born into this aristocratic milieu, Constantin Alexandru "C. A." Rosetti was a man of many trades (actor, translator, printer, shop-owner), aByronian poet by vocation, and a self-confessed friend of the people.^[5] Already as a teenager, he joined the secretive boyar clubs which subverted theRegulamentul Organic regime, and expanded his circle of acquaintances while studying with fellow Romanian radicals at theCollège de France.^[6] Also then, he joined the Freemasonry'sAthénée des Étrangers, becoming Masonic brothers with Ion C. and Dimitrie Brătianu, and with the Jewish revolutionary painterConstantin Daniel Rosenthal.^[7]

During the 1848 events, Rosetti and Ion Brătianu organized thetanners and the youth into a revolutionary force, toppling theRegulamentul rule. Briefly imprisoned, Rosetti became BucharestAgha in just a couple of days, and was instrumental in combating counterrevolutionary activities.^[8] He was also among the negotiators who tried to reach a quick compromise with theOttoman Empire, their liberal suzerain, against the wishes ofImperial Russia, their autocratic supervisor.^[6]

Between these assignments, he edited the revolution's first and main gazette,Pruncul Român ("The Romanian Infant"). Although short lived, it enshrined in popular memory the ethical and cultural commands of Wallachianpașoptism ("48-ism").^[9] It is also commonly seen as a direct precursor ofRomânul.^[10]

Eventually, the Ottomans intervened in force against the Wallachian revolutionaries. After some mishaps, Rosetti joined his former government colleagues in their Western European exile. At that stage, he adopted the left-wing interpretation of revolutionary failure, proposing that, hadland reform been enacted and peasants emancipated fromcorvées, the revolutionary government would have been legitimate and defended.^[9] He saw the future Romanian state as a republic, without "princes and boyars, without masters and servants, [...] without protectors and suzerains".^[9] At the time, Rosetti had found a new idol inItaly's radical ideologueGiuseppe Mazzini, reading and translating Mazzini's fraternal manifestoAlle popolazioni Rumene ("To the Romanian Peoples").^[11] The Wallachian exile took toagnosticism, reading both the Bible andatheistic tracts, and refusing to baptize his children byMaria Rosetti-Grant.^[12] By then, Rosetti and his men were perceived as extremists even among the leftist Wallachian émigrés:Nicolae Bălcescu, a radical, complained that the Rosettists were "communists", and that their supposed critique ofproperty as theft was irritatingly obstructionist.^[13]

TheCrimean War (which placed Wallachia and Moldavia under direct supervision of theGreat Powers) meant C. A. Rosetti and Ion Brătianu were allowed to return home. They both became involved with the "National Party", which campaigned for aMoldo-Wallachian Union.Românul was founded in this period of turmoil, when the National Party was slowly eroding the separatist vote in thead-hoc Divans. Its first issue came out on 9 August 1857, barely a month after Rosetti had been invited back to Wallachia.^[14] According to one interpretation,Românul existed since February 1857, under the titleConcordia ("Concord"), and changed it upon Rosetti's arrival to Bucharest.^[15]Românul was originally a weekly (twice a week: 1857–1858; thrice a week: 1858–1859), but became a daily in 1859.^[16]

The offices were originally located at No. 15 Caimatei Street.^[17]Românul then moved into thePasagiul Român, renting flats from Rosetti's friend and upholsterer Peter Friedrich Bossel (a location later used by Rosetti for hisenoteca).^[18] The newspaper would then move shop to Rosetti's house at No. 14 Doamnei Street, and eventually to No. 2 Academiei Street (byCalea Victoriei).^[17]

In itself, the paper's definitive name showed the patriotic fervor of the 1850s, and especially the cause of Romanian nation-building, when the name "Romanian" slowly replaced references to "Moldavian", "Wallachian" etc.^[19] At the time, both sides of the National Party, "White" conservatives and "Red" liberals, were engaged in supporting the unionist project. From the start, the paper used the twin slogansVoesce (orVoiește)și vei putea; Luminează-te și vei fi ("Will It and You Shall Achieve; Enlighten Yourself and You Shall Become"). On one level, these mottos reflected Rosetti's belief in popular education by means of the press, but were actually coined by Ion Brătianu,^[20] and probably inspired to him by Masonic lore.^[21]

In its first manifesto, also conceived by Brătianu, the paper exhorted theRomanians of both countries to reflect on their shared lineage: "[the Romanians'] interests are identical, they had to suffer through the same things, and they have the same ideas about what they should do to make things better for themselves."^[22] BibliographerEugène Hatin notes that, together with the more moderateNaționalul, the "ultra-liberal" Rosettist tribune had "the greatest influence on those events which, in Romania, marked the years 1857 to 1859."^[23]Românul hosted contributions from the archeologist and political agitatorCezar Bolliac, who spoke out against the anti-Wallachian government of Moldavia. Bolliac attacked separatistNicolae Vogoride for having shut down the unionist mouthpieceSteaua Dunării, and demandedfreedom of the press.^[24] C. A. Rosetti himself was Secretary of the Bucharest ad-hoc Divan, which confirmed the newMoldavian princeAlexander John Cuza asprince of Wallachia. Rosetti then journeyed to Moldavia, as president of the delegation which informed Cuza that the personal union had been effected.^[25] He is also credited with having put together the "Red" contingency plan, that of a "revolution", had the Bucharest Divan opted not to elect Cuza.^[26]

Alongside the tightening of Cuza's union, Rosetti's cultural project involved agitation for international cooperation, forPan-Latinism andFrancophilia. In an 1857 editorial forRomânul, Ion Brătianu presented the earliest "Red" take on theorigin of the Romanians. In his view, the Romanian people belonged to three noble families: theThracians were its roots; theRomans its political backbone; theCelts its intimate link with France.^[27]Românul also preserved a mythical image of C. A. Rosetti's Italian models. The newspaper's office was decorated with the portraits of Mazzini andGiuseppe Garibaldi.^[28] Years later, Garibaldi wrote to thank Rosetti for having regularly sent him issues ofRomânul.^[29]

There was a less transparent agenda followed by theRomânul ideologues. According to Călinescu, Rosetti had adopted liberalism only because it conveyed his ideal of national independence, and, beneath the "extravagant and fanatical" liberal dogma, he was more of a "reactionary".^[30] During the struggle for union, Rosetti took a pragmatic approach. He was one of the party's envoys to theFrench Empire, and noted with satisfaction thatNapoleon III "defends us like a fellow Romanian".^[31] Nevertheless, he stood against his increasingly nationalistic colleagues in the "Red" faction for always prioritizingpopular sovereignty andmajoritarianism over the supposed interests of the Romanian race.^[32]

Meanwhile,Românul itself experienced some pushes towardethnic nationalism. In a later article, explaining his concept of a Roman racial and political legacy in modern-day life, Ion Brătianu came to the conclusion that democracy was innate to the Romanian psyche, but also subsumed to the other national characteristics.^[33] Just one year after Brătianu's praise of the Thracian-Roman-Celtic conglomerate, Bolliac usedRomânul to publicize his finds about the ancientDacians, and his theory that the Romanian identity had very deep, non-Roman, roots.^[34]

The idea behind Rosetti's movement was aLeft-Hegelian concept, paraphrased by literary historianGeorge Călinescu as "God is revealed in nations", and inducing the notion of a united front against oppression.^[35] Early Rosettism was remarkably open to the social integration ofRomanian Jews. In the age ofliberal nationalism, Rosetti andRomânul were condemning the spread ofantisemitic violence andblood libel literature in Romania. The campaign, also taken up by Rosetti's political rivalIon Heliade Rădulescu, persuaded the Wallachian authorities to shut down an antisemitic gazettePraștia ("Slingshot").^[36]

With a primarily cultural agenda,Românul gathered around it a cosmopolitan and multicultural club. In its first year, it hosted one of the firstserialized novels inRomanian literature, calledOmul muntelui ("Man of the Mountain"). Signed by a "Lady L.", it was probably written by the Franco-Romanian Marie Boucher (who enlisted the help of Moldavian authorV. A. Urechia).^[37] Two other women writers were noted contributors toRomânul. One was Rosetti'sGuernseyian wife Maria. The other was a Moldavian unionist,Sofia Cocea.^[38]

Românul also received contributions fromAustrianE. "Iernescu" Winterhalder, the pioneerstenographer and co-owner of Rosetti's print shop.^[39] Winterhalder and Rosetti had already collaborated on analmanac of literature, which notably hosted some of the first works by the junior "48-ist"Alexandru Odobescu.^[40] In an 1859 piece forRomânul, Winterhalder assured the reading public that Bucharest was fast becoming recognized for itsWesternization efforts.^[41] Odobescu himself was a staff writer atRomânul, where he published his historical novella onMihnea cel Rău (October 1857), and then his friendly polemic with Rosetti, on the subject ofdramaturgy.^[42] TheRomânul founder was twice manager of theNational Theatre Bucharest, and, as such, published calls for the young boyars to sponsor thenational repertoire, or chronicles of the plays staged by theater pioneerMatei Millo.^[43] Similar articles were later published inRomânul by the actress and feministMaria Flechtenmacher.^[44]

In May 1858,Românul publishedSciarlatanul ("The Charlatan"), a story by the Wallachian novelistAlexandru Pelimon.^[45] Also in correspondence with the newspaper, theAromanian Romantic poetDimitrie Bolintineanu introduced the work of his disciple,Mihail Zamphirescu (August 1858), and complained about the disenfranchisement of Aromanian immigrants to Romania (March 1861).^[46]Românul played host to theAlbano-Romanian aristocratDora d'Istria, being one of the first local periodicals to acknowledge her literary work (her text,L'Italia s'è fatta!, was published by Rosetti in December 1860).^[47]

Just months after the union act, Rosetti fell out with Cuza: he called for faster and ampler structural reforms than those effected by theDomnitor's moderate government.^[48] Together with the political humoristN. T. Orășanu, he began issuingȚânțarul ("The Mosquito"). Purportedly the first ever Romanian satirical magazine, it was only in print until 15 August 1859.^[15] On 24 September, Cuza orderedRomânul to be shut down, nominating it as one of the gazettes who had "forgotten the respect they owe to the powers that be"; the other wasNikipercea, a new satirical magazine put out by Orășanu.^[48] Among those who protested against this measure was a young liberal,Eugeniu Carada. Remarked by Rosetti, and recommended by Bolliac,^[49][50] Carada worked forRomânul until 1871 (and was briefly engaged to Rosetti's daughter Libby).^[51]

Soon after, the newspaper was again in print, with Carada as editorial secretary, then editorial manager. His articles were a condemnation of censorship and arbitrariness, with slogans such as: "the greater the tyranny, the more violent the liberty."^[52] He and Rosetti reputedly wrote much of the newspaper together, and even worked on each other's articles. Such contributions were many times unsigned or pseudonymous, making it nearly impossible to determine authorship.^[53] In 1860, when Rosetti served as Minister of Education in the Wallachian government ofNicolae Golescu, Carada refused to fill in asRomânul chief, considering himself unfit for the part.^[53]

Carada still took over much of the editorial activity, since theRomânul founders were employed on other tasks, and participated in the debates on dramaturgy. He wrote suggestions about stagingHamlet (March 1861), and published condemnations of "immoral" shows at the National Theater.^[50] With Rosetti absent, he introduced new columns: a summary of foreign news; aParliamentary column with a summary of political discussions; a section for cultural news and anecdotes; and a new selection of (usuallymodern French) serialized novels.^[50] In time, he began signing his contributions, including the political column once monopolized by Rosetti, and began using a milder and drier rhetoric, while defendingRomânul against accusations of frivolousness (specifically, those voiced by writer-politicianIon Ghica).^[50]

A historian,Constantin D. Aricescu, became the new director, having already served asRomânul administrator since 1859.^[54] He had not previously been regarded as a journalist, since the custom of the day was to formally distinguish between writers and administrators.^[50] Also then, the writing staff was joined byNicolae Nicoleanu, better known as a poet of the Romanian salons.^[55] Others were drawn in by Rosetti's criticism of the regime.Pantazi Ghica, the lawyer and Romantic author, published Orășanu's appeal from prison, addressed to the readers ofRomânul andNikipercea, then opened a donation list for the anti-Cuza protesters arrested inOltenia.^[56] Odobescu also returned with an open letter, claiming that Wallachia's government, underManolache Costache Epureanu, was pressuring civil servants into voting "White".^[57] During 1861, Rosetti settled his scores with the leader of "48-ist" moderates, Heliade Rădulescu. The radicals' chief, who had helped marginalize Rădulescu since the 1850s, published a scathing satire by the Wallachian RomanticGrigore Alexandrescu, which showed a terrified Rădulescu choking on his envy.^[58]

In this new edition,Românul campaigned for the creation of a volunteer police force, the "Citizens' Guard", in support of the embryonicRomanian Army. In August 1862, it argued that such a Guard was urgently needed "to preserve obedience to the law, to keep and reaffirm public order and peace, to help the standing army in defending the country's borders, to preserve the country's autonomy and her territorial integrity".^[59] Rosetti held the military in high esteem, refusing to protect Aricescu when he was arrested for insulting the officers.^[54]

The attempts to forge an independent military were not well received by the Ottomans, who tried to impose ablockade on the arms trade. Although some weapons were confiscated in the process,Românul informed its readers that, with French assistance, many were still passing through.^[60]Românul, available to the Romanian intellectuals inBessarabia (aGuberniya of the Russian Empire) at some 4silver руб. per year, was read and censored by the GovernorMikhail Fonton de Verraillon before being made available to the Bessarabian public.^[61] By then, Rosetti was hosting pieces which announced projects of uniting the federated principalities with the other Romanian-inhabited provinces. In a letter forRomânul, the Bessarabian-born scholarBogdan Petriceicu Hasdeu claimed: "I was the first to raise a toast for fusing together all parts of the vast Romania."^[62]

Meanwhile, Rosetti and his supporters were scheming to depose theauthoritarianDomnitor. Like many other liberals, they feared that Cuza was slowly doing away with Romania'stwo-party system, and monopolizing the application of reforms.^[63] In 1863, the newspaper inaugurated its practice of reviving republican rhetoric whenever a ruling monarch disagreed with Rosetti, although it also supported Cuza's replacement with a foreign prince.^[64] According to theBrașov paperGazeta Transilvaniei,Românul was by then an organ of the "oligarchy" (comprising a "tightly democratic party" and a "boyar party"), backingPremierNicolae Kretzulescu in his standoff with Cuza.^[65] AtBuciumul gazette, Aricescu and Bolliac also turned againstRomânul, "the Oligarchy", and the "monstrous coalition", praising Cuza as the real democrat.^[54] Although it lost Aricescu,Românul employedRadu Ionescu, who had been imprisoned by Cuza and had feigned madness to get out, andI. C. Fundescu, who had fled from Bucharest to Moldavia in order to escape the monarch's wrath.^[66]

In late 1863, Carada was assigned to contact Europe's radical underground, gaining Mazzini's support for Cuza's ouster.^[67] Before leaving, he addressed an emotional letter of homage to Rosetti, Brătianu and others "form the great family that is the National Party", honoring them as his educators in matters of civic mindedness.^[49] At home, Rosetti began working with thePolish migrants, who came to the principalities in the wake of theJanuary Uprising, and who were still determined to fight Russia.Românul men attended the "sublime ceremony" organized by Polish revolutionaries inBărăția Church,^[68] and praised the Romanian legislators for setting aside funds to benefit the new arrivals (January 1864).^[69] As Russia called on Cuza to evict these expatriates, the Rosettists urged tolerance, dismissing rumors that the Romanian authorities would take their cue fromTsar Alexander.^[70]

Românul's friendship with the Poles alarmed the fellow "Red" Hasdeu. In Hasdeu's definition, the Poles were "a bunch of irresponsible people" whose revolutionary agenda clashed with popular opinion. Cuza's ultimate decision to banish the Polish diaspora committees, Hasdeu claimed, was prophylactic.^[71] In reply, the Rosettists added to their international propaganda campaign allegations that Cuza was aRussophile^[72] and a scheming illiberal.^[73] According to Rosetti andRomânul, Cuza had betrayed his promise that "those who set their foot on Romanian soil are freed men".^[74]

From early 1864, once Cuza installed a personal regime in lieu of parliamentarism,Românul was explicitly in the political opposition. Rosetti's first editorial after Cuza's coup announced that, as a sign of protest,Românul would simply refuse to publish political news, and implied that a reign of terror had begun.^[75] Reportedly, this boycott irritated the government, keen to preserve the image of liberalism.Românul then returned to political news, with a letter from Rosetti's political ally,Ștefan Golescu, who claimed that he and his family were being harassed by the authorities.^[76] Afterwards, the newspaper openly attacked Cuza for changing the organic laws and forappealing to the nation.^[77] According toGazeta Transilvaniei, it was losing popular support in the provinces, as many of those "who previously held [Românul] as their gospel" switched to the Cuza camp.Gazeta concluded that the Wallachian public was largely unprincipled, with the ideological worth of "watermelon flowers".^[65]

Although still plotting Cuza's ouster,Românul took a favorable view of theland reform enacted by theDomnitor, and acclaimed him for decreeing thesecularization of monastery estates.^[78] The so-called "rural law", which granted monastery land to the peasants, was republished byRomânul in 2,000 copies (about a third of the copies in circulation).^[79] The gazette also initiated a humanitarian campaign to help Bucharesters stricken by the June 1864 floods, and collected some 5,000Ducats through public subscription.^[80]

On 25 July 1865, during troubles in the capital, Cuza again banned the Rosettist tribune. Just one day later, Rosetti produced the newspaperLibertatea ("Freedom"), which was in effectRomânul under a new title.^[81] This edition was also banned by the Cuza regime, but, after only eight days, the newspaper reemerged asConsciinti'a Nationala ("National Conscience").^[82] Italian observers received such news with concern:Nuova Antologia wrote that the "persecution" of liberal newspapers, and in particular the shutting down of "Romanulu, press organ of the democratic leader Mr. Rossetti [sic]", jeopardized Cuza's good reputation.^[83]

Carada had by then made his way back to Bucharest, and was fast becoming one of the most anti-Cuza publicists. HisConsciinti'a Nationala piece of 1 August 1865 claimed that the monarch's offer ofuniversal suffrage was a sham, and that, in the1864 election, "a flock of ignoramuses" had reconfirmed "a shameless dictator."^[84] Cuza retorted by arresting Rosetti, who was briefly held in a Bucharest prison,^[85] and by shutting downConsciinti'a Nationala.^[82]Românul had already warned its public that, due to the Polish affair, Russia was pressuring Cuza into censoring the press.^[79] It is probable that theRussian Consulate ordered the raid on theRomânul offices, confiscating some issues of Rosetti's other periodical (Ecclesia) and the manuscript of a Bessarabian novel (Aglaie, probably written byConstantin Stamati-Ciurea).^[86] When it first seemed that Cuza's regime was going to clamp down onConsciinti'a Nationala, Carada decided to take full responsibility for his own agenda. Without handing in his resignation, he inaugurated his own, entirely anti-Cuza, gazette:Clopotul ("The Tocsin").^[87]

The radicals were active participants in the "monstrous coalition" coup that brought Cuza's downfall in February 1866. At the helm of a "Mazzinian" secret committee,^[88] C. A. Rosetti and his pupilConstantin Ciocârlan represented the leftist "Reds" in the conspiracy. They reputedly promised to lead the Bucharest populace into a show of support. When no one showed up for the rally, the other conspirators teased Rosetti with the question: "Where is that people of yours?"^[89]Românul, again in print when Cuza left the country,^[82] romanticized the events, referring to the coup's anniversary as "a holy day" in the Romanian calendar.^[90] According to a popular myth, Rosetti and Carada were the secret authors of theJune 1866 Constitution, largely translated, in one night, from theBelgian model.^[91]

Thetriumvirate of regents appointed Rosetti theRomanian Minister of Education and Religious Affairs, in which capacity he instituted theRomanian Academic Society.^[26][92] Rumors circulated that the Minister had made strange efforts to democratize his institution, addressing his subordinates as "brothers", and introducing hiscirculaires with theRomânul mottoLuminează-te și vei fi.^[85] He resigned shortly after his Constitution passed thepopular vote, allegedly because he did not enjoy being in power.^[82]

During the subsequent debates,Românul did not necessarily oppose the annulment of Cuza's universal suffrage, nor its replacement withcensus suffrage. The paper hosted some articles in which "A Subscriber" proposed to maintain in spirit Cuza's electoral reform, but his opinion had no discernible echoes.^[93] Writing for Rosetti'salmanac (Calendarulŭ Romanului), but a conservative at heart, Radu Ionescu stated the case in his essayJustiție și libertate ("Justice and Freedom"). Ionescu argued that dividing the country into wealth-based electoral colleges was "the ultimate expression of democracy". However, he conditioned the reform's success on the thorough application of "electoral freedom".^[94]

By then, Rosetti had also been granted approval for his "Citizens' Guard". Legislation to this effect, passed in January 1864 and vetoed by Cuza, was enforced in March 1866.^[59] The new armed force, primarily a Rosettist and officially classless institution, comprised thepetite bourgeoisie and skilled workers, most of whom were also subscribers toRomânul.^[95] During April 1866,Românul reported about the intrigues of Moldavian separatists and Russophiles, who, under boyarsNicolae Roznovanu andConstantin A. Moruzi, attempted to provoke a quick breakup of the United Principalities. According to its account, the scandal, which ended in bloodshed, had been planted by Russia: "The complicity of the government inSaint Petersburg is self-evident; the enterprise of the Russian subject Moruzi, with his Phanariotes, hisLipovans and his other foreigners, has shown what sort of support Russia can expect to get from the Romanians ofIași!"^[96] In contrast, the Citizens' Guard was advertised byRomânul as not just an instrument of public order, but also "the great, beautiful, liberal and national institution".^[97]

The period of instability ended when the liberal bloc agreed to back a foreign aristocrat for the position ofDomnitor. The throne was ultimately accepted by aHohenzollern-Sigmaringen prince,Carol I. The "Reds" were initially placated by the selection, but their discontent grew once Carol made "White" politics his own.^[98] For Carol, Rosetti was a suspicious figure on the "far left", orHaupt der extremen Radikalen ("Head of the extreme Radicals").^[25] While the "White" camp became aPrussian party, the liberals oscillated between Francophilia and Russophilia. The Rosettists had a key position: they supported Russia whenever she promised emancipation to the Ottomans' Christian subjects, even at the risk of upsetting France (isolated as it was by the continentalGreat Powers).^[99]

Before and after the February coup, Rosetti's paper strongly supported the creation of a reformed Romanian Army, under GeneralGheorghe Magheru. Dimitrie Brătianu's columns suggested a volunteer defense force, comprising some 30,000 men.^[100] The newspaper hinted that the Army could switch to an offensive role for the cause ofirredentism, referring to the toppling ofImperial Austrian rule over Romanian-inhabitedTransylvania—as had been the case in Italy with Garibaldi'sRedshirts.^[101] At the time, Romania also feared that Cuza's dethronement opened the way for a new Ottoman invasion.^[102] At hisRomânul office, Rosetti was contacted byBulgarian revolutionary Ivan Kasabov, who represented theInternal Revolutionary Organization in the conspiracy against Ottoman rule. Rosetti, Carada and Ciocârlan were the Romanian contacts of theBulgarian Central Committee, helping it prepare for an uprising inRumelia, and transmitting its messages to Mazzini.^[103]

By summer 1866,Românul was in contact with a Moldavian-born adventurer,Titus Dunka, who had gained distinction as a Redshirt in theThird Italian War of Independence. Recommended to Rosetti by Garibaldi himself, Dunka arrived in Wallachia with his commanderIstván Türr, enlisting local men for a projected anti-Austrian revolutionary army.^[100] These efforts blended with the creation of a Romanian volunteer army: in a letter toRomânul, Dunka's father Ștefan offered his services as an officer; meanwhile, in Austrian Transylvania, a military invasion by Romania was being factored in as a likely scenario.^[100]

Between March 1867 and November 1868, Rosettist radicalism was the governing ideology of Romania, and Rosetti even continued to serve as Minister of Education and Religious Affairs. The three successive Rosettist "Red" cabinets passed legislation favoring the Citizens' Guard, and supplied it with arms bought atpublic auction.^[104] During this momentary "Red" triumph,Românul was joined by a former rival, Bogdan Petriceicu Hasdeu. Although he only contributed toRomânul during that interval, he cemented the Rosettists' all-Romanian unionist agenda. Making frequent study trips to Transylvania (whereRomânul was available at 40florins annually),^[105] Hasdeu wrote ideological articles against all forms ofregionalism, praising the newly founded Academic Society as the vanguard of ethnic uniformity.^[106]

Românul's agenda was complimented by the satirical magazineGhimpele, which vulgarized the "Red" interpretation of current events.^[107]Românul employed Hasdeu's friend and formerGhimpele contributorGheorghe Dem Theodorescu, who stayed on as editor until 1874,^[108] and, as theater critic,Al. Lăzărescu-Laerțiu (who died in 1876).^[109]

InRomânul, Hasdeu reiterated the major objective of "Red" nationalism: the integration of Transylvania.^[106] Distanced from the group, and acting as Romanian diplomatic agent inPest,Radu Ionescu censured such projects: "People of influence do not take into account the annexation of Transylvania, as that would be very difficult for us, given [the region's] varied races".^[110] However, the Romanian community of Austria (and ofAustria-Hungary from 1867) was quick to respond to this agenda. TheBanat RomanianIulian "Julianu" Grozescu, who visited Rosetti in Bucharest, argued that the Bucharest newspaper's "strength of character" was worthy "of the most civilized nations".^[111] The Transylvanian militant journalistGeorge Bariț was a regular correspondent, reporting on the clashes of opinion between Romanians and Hungarians,^[112] andIoniță Scipione Bădescu sent in for publishing some of his first poetic works.^[113]

The evident rapprochement between Prussia, Austria-Hungary and Russia was disappointing for Rosetti, but not so for I. Brătianu. There was a rift between theRomânul liberals: Brătianu took the Prussian advise and opened channels of communication with Russia; inRomânul, Rosetti cautioned that Russia was only after theBudjak area and theDanube Delta (an argument much like those advanced by "White" diplomacy).^[114] Meanwhile, Dunka also took his distance from Rosetti. He traveled toOdessa. where he paid a personal homage toTsar Alexander.^[99]

In this setting, a major political scandal shook Romania. The Romanian establishment, internationally noted for its unwillingness to adoptJewish emancipation, was being asked by the Western governments to naturalize its largeJewish community. As Minister, Rosetti was directly interested in the matter, and looked favorably on the naturalization project.Românul exchanged pleasantries with the Jewish community leaders during theChoral Temple inauguration, and its editor probably intervened in favor of the Wallachian Jewish communities.^[115] Rosetti's tolerance was noticed by anantisemitic lobby within "Red" liberalism, and in particular by Bolliac'sTrompeta Carpaților gazette—in August 1866, it alleged that Rosetti, I. Brătianu andRomânul were surrendering the country to theAlliance Israélite Universelle.^[116] In the end, Hasdeu's ideas on Jews and antisemitism also made it into the columns ofRomânul. His 1868 essayIstoria toleranțeĭ religióse în Romănia ("The History of Religious Toleration in Romania"), serialized by the "Red" paper, distinguished between three kinds of Judaism: the ancient religion—indifferent to the Romanians, "Spanish Judaism"—more positive than not, and "Polish Judaism"—entirely pernicious, exploitative.^[117]

Românul's ideological stance, and in particular its antisemitic position, were being reviewed with concern by the rival newspaperTérra, put out by the "Whites"Nicolae Moret Blaremberg andPetre P. Carp. The latter identified the Hasdeu–Rosetti enterprise of being a "Karkaleki newspaper", following in the footsteps of demagogic and mystifying journalism; it also ridiculed Hasdeu's opinions on politics, art and literature.^[118] For Carp, the time of "48-ist" glory had passed, and it fell on the "Whites" to begin "the more modest work of [national] consolidation".^[119]Térra accepted Jewish emancipation, condemned the renewed spread of antisemitic violence in the provinces, and accused the radical "Red" ministers,Ștefan Golescu and Ion Brătianu included, of being hypocrites.^[120]

By late 1868, the liberals' opposition to thestatus quo, and especially the toleration of Bulgarian revolutionaries on Romanian soil, generated an international scandal, and the radical cabinet ofNicolae Golescu was intimidated into relinquishing power; "Whites" leaderDimitrie Ghica took over the premiership.^[121] D. Ghica was also supported from abroad as a means to curb the antisemitic disturbances.^[122] Again in the opposition,Românul was eventually convinced to tone down its pro-Bulgarian activism, assuming the official government position and, according toAppleton'sAmerican Annual Cyclopædia, "exhort[ing] the inhabitants of Bulgaria to preserve tranquility."^[123]

Soon after,Românul backed the government's show of force against theHungarian colony in Wallachia, applauding from the side as the Hungarian revolutionary journal,Hunnia, was forcefully shut down.^[124][125]Hunnia founderFerenc Koós, who was ordered to leave Romania, later alleged that theRomânul founder had personally warned him not to be too good a Hungarian patriot.^[126] However, Rosetti still inventoried cases of government abuse. In October 1869,Românul reported aGendarme raid onCuca-Măcăi village, during which several peasants were arbitrarily killed.^[127]

The year 1870 opened with a step toward national sovereignty, as Carol approved the creation of a national currency, theRomanian leu. Unlike Hasdeu's liberals,Românul andTrompeta Carpaților were supporters of the measure, although Carada made sanguine comments about the "feudal" coinage inscription ("Lord of the Romanians") and the conspicuous absence ofsenators from the royal ceremony.^[128] Titus Dunka, who had settled to a quiet life in Romania, became a correspondent of bothRomânul andGhimpele.^[129] D. Bolintineanu returned with analytical articles on current events, writing until April 1870, when old age and disease incapacitated him.^[130]

Only months later, when theFranco-Prussian War erupted, Dunka volunteered to fight on the French side, and was also Rosetti's war reporter, before falling wounded outsideSoissons.^[131] When news of the French Empire'sultimate defeat reached Romania,Românul commended the returning Romanians for having rendered "the most accurate and ardent expression" of Romania's love for "her older sister in the West".^[132] Rosetti himself left Romania to cover theFrench Republic's effort to resist Prussian attacks, interviewingLéon Gambetta and Garibaldi.^[133] Thefall of Paris (28 January 1871) was a shock forRomânul. News of this was published with the symbols of mourning, and introduced with the words:[h]oardele teutone calcă sacrul pământ ("Teutonic hordes are trampling upon hallowed ground").^[134] In June,Românul announced that its founder was leaving Romania for a longer while, settling inSouthern France with the intent of educating his children.^[135] He only returned in March 1871, having left the newspaper in Carada's care.^[50]

The conflict at home was exacerbated by theStrousberg Affair, revealing a direct Prussian involvement in theRomanian Railways project. The situation was rendered explosive by the mixture of republicanism, Francophilia andanti-German sentiment, intertwined with Dimitrie Brătianu's more utopian program: a Mazzinianworld government.^[136] The commercial hub ofPloiești (orPloeșcii) played home to a republican committee, taking its orders from D. Brătianu and the Rosettists. The club's leaders were poetAlexandru Sihleanu and military manAlexandru Candiano-Popescu. During theelectoral battle of 1870, Sihleanu took up D. Brătianu's claim that Ploiești was the citadel of democracy, writing inRomânul: "The patriotic and Romanian City of Ploeșcii takes the forefront; the City of Ploeșcii, the Paladin of citizens' virtues is the only one that has declared, at the top of its lungs, to Romania and to the entire world, that betrayal and perjury have lived past their lifetime; that such apparitions emerging from the strains of villainy must find their exploitation venue elsewhere; must seek their hanging spot at some other location".^[137] Arrested after publishing similar exhortations, Candiano was released following repeated protests by Sihleanu andRomânul.^[137]

In December 1870, a large coalition, specifically directed against Carol's policies, propelled theIon Ghica government, perceived by historians as "a ministry to liquidate the dynasty".^[138] Carol, who found that German support for his rule was not forthcoming (due to the Strousberg dispute), resorted to a publicity stunt, publishing an ultimatum-like defense of his principles in theAugsburger Allgemeine (afterwards translated by all Romanian newspapers).^[139] Moderate liberals such asMihail Kogălniceanu were persuaded to rally with the cause of public order, and the Ion Ghica coalition was weakened.^[140]

The anti-Carlist radicals were unrelenting, and, in August 1870, organized the "Republic of Ploiești" incident, in fact a halfhearted rebellion against the throne. It was largely prepared by Carada and Candiano-Popescu,^[141] but thought to have been actively encouraged by the liberal leaders. While Rosetti went into hiding to escape arrest, Carada taunted the authorities with aRomânul article, publicizing his whereabouts and inviting them to drop in for a visit.^[142] Both of the editors were apprehended, and, together with Brătianu and the others, were subject to a mass trial inTârgoviște. They counsel was a fellow liberal,Nicolae Fleva, who claimed that the prosecutors were in fact working to silenceRomânul—his arguments convinced the tribunal, and all the republican conspirators were released in October 1870.^[143] In December, echoes of the movement were showing in Bucharest, where crowds gathered to protest against German pressures.Românul again expressed sympathy for the anti-Carlists, and alleged that theDomnitor's troops had used force in dealing with the protesters.^[144]

The Bucharest republicans were again rioting in March 1871. They managed to intimidate Carol, who was again on the verge of abdicating, but the "White" cabinet ofLascăr Catargiu regained the upper hand.^[145]Românul stood out for proclaiming Catargiu's rule to be unconstitutional, and for wrongly betting that a new "Red" coalition would depose it—I. Brătianu himself ended the disturbance by openly acknowledging that theDomnitor was entitled to curb the urban agitation.^[146] On 23 March, Rosetti's gazette severed its links with the other "Reds", rejecting Brătianu's pragmatic approach.^[50]

Meanwhile, Carada resigned from Rosetti's newspaper, dedicating himself to the study of economics. He was possibly disappointed by the hastiness of republican activists, and moving closer to the moderate "Reds".^[50][147] He was soon replaced by the FrenchmanFrédéric Damé, a survivor of theParis Commune. Better known as a dramatist (and plagiarist),^[148] Damé was for long employed by Rosetti as aRomânul political columnist, and, in 1872, became the editorial secretary.^[149]

Românul journalists were again united in their criticism of Russian expansionism, and the newspaper claimed thatDomnitor Carol was secretly negotiating the Budjak's cession to Russia; it also called for a better administrative and defense system in that region.^[150] The Rosettists were still focused on the unionist cause, but looked mainly to the Romanian-inhabited Austrian province ofBukovina. By July 1871,Românul was involved in the Bukovinian festivities atPutna Monastery, commemorating medieval heroStephen the Great. When the Austrian administration made efforts to disperse the popular assembly,Românul reported with sarcasm: "it's as if the purpose of the reunion had been to reconquer Bukovina and overturn the precious [Austrian] empire".^[151]

1872 and 1873 were problematic years for the Rosettists. Heading a consolidated "White" party, Premier Catargiu felt secure enough to disarm and reorganize the Citizens' Guard.^[152] The "Red" idol, Mazzini, died in March 1872.Românul hosted an obituary by Dimitrie Brătianu, who spoke with melancholy about the decades-long collaboration between the Italian and Romanian revolutionists.^[28] Rosetti also saw himself dragged in the conflict opposing the Transylvanian Romanian factions ofVincențiu Babeș andAlexandru Papiu Ilarian. Babeș denouncedRomânul for having published inflammatory articles against him, claiming that their pseudonymous author,Camiliu, was none other than Papiu Ilarian.^[153]

From 1873, the liberal cultural establishment found itself scrutinized by the "White" literary societyJunimea. AJunimist founding figure,Iacob Negruzzi, had met theRomânul group in the 1860s, and informed the conservative club that its members were bland-looking, that Rosetti was "sententious", and that the overall atmosphere was "deplorable".^[154] In his better known lampoons,Junimea founderTitu Maiorescu attacked the "Red" academics and novelists as dilettantes. According to Maiorescu, these figures had polluted theliterary language (an "inebriation with words") and had excited the reading public with the most questionable information.^[155]

The "Red" intellectuals, many of whom were contributors toRevista Contimporană, opted to respond by means ofRomânul. In July 1873, it published defenses ofPantazi Ghica's novellas, including the author's own replies to Maiorescu gibes, and anencomium of Ghica by the young theater criticȘtefan Sihleanu.^[156] P. Ghica was subsequently thegossip columnist atRomânul andTelegraful, stirring much animosity with his scathing remarks aimed at the conservative establishment.^[56] Also responding inRomânul (and accused by Maiorescu of ignoring the issue) wereV. A. Urechia,Dimitrie August Laurian andPetru Grădișteanu.^[157] In March 1874,Românul was publicizing reports made by authorNifon Bălășescu, according to whom there were 16 million Romanians (Aromanians) living in Ottoman territory. This account was highly exaggerated, and toned down forJunimea by the Aromanian activistApostol Mărgărit.^[158]

A new member of theRomânul staff wasConstantin Dimitrescu-Severeanu, later a famous surgeon.^[159] During that time, the Rosettists also welcomed in their ranks the aspiring journalistIon Luca Caragiale, later recognized as one of Romania's foremost humorists. Caragiale, a self-asserted Ploiești Republican who then recanted in embarrassment, acquired an intimate understanding of "Red" politicking before converting to "White" conservatism.^[160]

The liberal andprotectionist clubs were outraged when, in June 1875, Catargiu signed a trade agreement with Austria-Hungary. Against the "Red" program of industrialization, the "Whites" advocated an agricultural economy, and thus took little issue with unrestricted imports. This difference in policies was outlined in aRomânul article by F. Damé.^[161] In parallel,Românul's stance regarding Hungarian activities in Transylvania was creating controversy over the border, and it was reportedly banned by local government the market town ofMehadia.^[162] Romanian Hungarian historian Hilda Hencz argues thatRomânul andGazeta Transilvaniei forged "a monstrous image of Hungary and the Hungarians."^[163] The newspaper was actively promoting the patriotic cult of Wallachian princeMichael the Brave, noted for his conquest of Transylvania and Moldavia, and helped determine the ultimate location of his statue:University Square, downtown Bucharest.^[21] The Austro-Hungarian affair also amplifiedRomânul's anti-Carlist rhetoric, more so after its old allyN. T. Orășanu was sacked from the civil service, for having subscribed to an anti-"White" petition.^[164]

With support from the anti-Austrian EnglishmanStephen "Mazar Pașa" Lakeman, the liberals consolidated their loose alliance, creating theNational Liberal Party (PNL). Rosetti and Ion Brătianu were the leaders of its radical wing, whose central tribune wasRomânul.^[165] Ion and Dimitrie Brătianu, together with young Caragiale, relocated to the main PNL-ist tribune,Alegătorul Liber ("The Enfranchised Voter").^[166] For a while, Titus Dunka headed the PNL's central Moldavian bureau, and became noted for his highly combative stances.^[132]

The PNL's creation inaugurated a new stage inRomânul's conflict with the "Whites". The dispute was political as well as cultural: the liberals strongly rejected thegradualist approach, regionalistic ethos, andGermanophile agenda ofJunimea. In February 1876, the aspiring poetry criticBonifaciu Florescu published aRomânul article specifically aimed at the top representatives ofJunimist literature, and in particular at the conservative rebelMihai Eminescu. An advocate of pureLatin prosody, Florescu found Eminescu's looser style to be anathema.^[167]

Rosetti's newspaper was thereafter a direct rival ofTimpul, theJunimist daily, and communicated with it through virulent lampoons. Later, with Eminescu as its political columnist,Timpul responded in kind, suggesting that, for all its patriotic credentials,Românul was a mouthpiece of "Phanariote" interests, only recently converted to the Romanian ways.^[168] Eminescu also delved into Damé's mysterious past, accusing him of having betrayed theCommunards.^[149] Rosetti's new right-hand man, and editorial secretary, was PNL manEmil Costinescu,^[17] ridiculed by Eminescu for his lack of formal education.^[169][170] Costinescu's articles matched those of Eminescu in vehemence, and, for this reason, he was provoked to a duel, and injured, by the "White" officer Alexandru Blaremberg.^[159]

In March 1879, Eminescu's editorial noted: "Românul's low regard for us we treasure just as much as we appreciate the high regard of intelligent and decent men."^[171] According to literary historianȘerban Cioculescu, Eminescu's articles inTimpul, from 1877 to 1883, made constant references to Rosetti as the head of a PNL-istpolitical machine.^[172] In this context, Caragiale left the "Red" camp and was co-opted byTimpul, still hesitating between theJunimists and the moderate National Liberals.^[173]

Disorder was again mounting in the country, especially since some of the National Liberals hinted that they were going to have Carol deposed and replaced with a local aristocrat, N. Dabija; faced with such threats, Carol yielded, and called on the PNL to assume government.^[174] When the PNL took power withManolache Costache Epureanu as Premier, and then with I. Brătianu, the Rosettists experienced a moment of triumph. From 1875 to 1884, the radicals were virtually in control of the PNL.^[175] During 1876, the Citizens' Guard regained its operative autonomy and elected itself a "Red" officers' corps.^[176] The "White" newspapers, in particularTimpul andPressa, were highly critical of this renewed campaign, describing it as aJacobin conspiracy against theDomnitor.^[177]

In the1876 suffrage, C. A. Rosetti was elected to theLower Chamber ofParliament, representing Bucharest.^[82] He was subsequently voted in as Chamber President, one of the top elected positions in the Romanian state.^[85] Nevertheless, the mid-1870s announcedRomânul's transition from Rosettist radicalism to all-out socialism, which made converts in his own family. The eldest son,Mircea Rosetti, came of age as a "Communard", militantatheist, andDarwinist, introducing his brotherVintilă Jules to the newer anti-capitalist literature (What Is to Be Done?).^[178] Vintilă also followed his father's Masonic commitments, joiningPisa'sLuce e progressoLodge.^[179] In late 1875, Mircea, Vintilă andHoria Rosetti were all studying in France, where they all contributed to radicalizing the Romanian National Liberal youth. Together withGheorghe Dem Theodorescu,Grigore Brătianu and economistGogu Cantacuzino, they founded theeconomic nationalist bloc later known as "Romanian Democratic Union".^[180]

Thanks in large part to Mircea Rosetti, theRomânul staff came to includeZamfir Arbore, theRussian nihilist and revolutionaryanarchist, who soon after made Romania his new home.^[181] In February and March 1877,Timpul picked up on such dealings, accusingRomânul and the Rosetti family of being in favor ofrevolutionary socialism andThe International.^[182] At that stage,Românul was under a printing contract with the company ofDimitrie August Laurian, who soon deserted the liberal cause and, as editor ofRomânia Liberă, turned toJunimism.^[183]

Controversy over socialist ideas blended with alarming developments in what was then known as the "Eastern Question"—including a strain in Romania's relationship with its Ottoman sovereign. Already in 1875,Românul was one of the most openly anti-Ottoman Romanian gazettes,^[184] taking up the rebel cause in theHerzegovina troubles and subsequentSerbian–Ottoman War, and calling for Romania to improve its relationship with Russia.^[185] It was, however, concerned about the Russian ambitions in the Budjak, and still prophesied that Romania stood to lose that strategic area.^[186] From early 1877, when Romanians woke up to the news that theOttoman Constitution regarded them as mere subjects of the Empire (Article 7),Românul styled itself the voice of "patriotic indignation", addressing letters of protest toMidhat Pasha, theGrand Vizier.^[187] Also then, the PNL founding figure "Mazar Pașa" Lakeman returned to Rosetti's gazette with an analytical essay,Armata teritorială față cu resursele țării ("The Territorial Army Faced with the Country's Resources").^[182]

Românul circulated rumors that a Romanian patrol was fired upon by theTurkish Army outsideGiurgiu, this being an Ottoman pretext for a planned invasion of Romania;^[185] later, it commended the government's efforts to secure the border areas and ignore the Ottoman provocations.^[188] As reported by a French diplomat on 6 January of that year: "[Rosetti followed] his revolutionary instincts that excluded all 'prudence' and 'reserve' when he took up criticism of the Turks' Constitution in his newspaper's columns".^[189]

When, in April 1877, the Ottoman state showed its dislike for theLondon Protocol,Românul commented that the question of war had entered Europe's daily agenda.^[190] The campaign for Romania's political emancipation was taken up byAlexandru Odobescu. Returning toRomânul as a political commentator, he linked the rejection of Ottoman rule to the very cause ofprogressivism.^[191] Odobescu's articles outlined a complex and personal vision, combining ideas about education in the national spirit with criticism of the neutralist position.^[192]

Just shortly before theRomanian War of Independence erupted within the largerRusso-Turkish conflict, Odobescu's articles launched the revolutionary sloganPiară acum dintre noi inimile codace! ("Perish the straggling hearts among us!").^[193] From 27 April, the newspaper put out two issues a day: a noon edition, with unfiltered news from the Ottoman and Russian borders; an evening edition and news digest. Also then, it began an inventory of public donations for the Romanian troops.^[194]

Rosetti, seen by some as "the cabinet's true leader",^[195] was a visible figure among those legislators who proclaimed full independence from the Ottoman Empire (May 1877).^[196] By order of theDomnitor, he was also appointedMayor of Bucharest.^[197] Once the Romanian Army was called in to help the Russians offensive into theDanube Vilayet,Românul closely followed the developments on the front, and hosted homages to the Romanian soldiers; Maria Rosetti looked after the wounded, while Vintilă and Horia volunteered for action.^[25] A French reporter, Apollo Mlochowski De Belina, believed thatRomânul wassensationalist, suggesting that some its claims about the Romanian military action were "Wallachiangasconades".^[198]

C. A. Rosetti was present at the meeting between Carol and Tsar Alexander, irritating the Russians with his speech about a liberation of theLevant, uttered just as a "Red" rally was being broken up elsewhere.^[199] Following victory in theSiege of Plevna, Rosetti again stirred controversy about the Citizens' Guard as a republican instrument, proclaiming that there was "an internal Plevna" still to be conquered.^[200][201] At around the same time,Românul suggested that the paramilitary units could survive the war, forming "an unwavering barrier against tyranny and despotism".^[202] Carried by a "literary boom", bothRomânul andTimpul became news sources for the Romanian community of Transylvania, their notices picked up byTelegraful Român, the influentialSibiu gazette.^[203] At around the same time,Teofil Frâncu, an educationist and anti-Hungarian militant from theApuseni Mountains, took over a position on Rosetti's editorial board.^[204]

TheBerlin Treaty confirmed the Rosettists' fears about Tsar Alexander, granting the Budjak to Russia, and awardingNorthern Dobruja, in compensation, to Romania. Writing forRomânul as the Powers renewed demands for a Jewish emancipation, Rosetti asserted that both Northern Dobruja and the acceptance of Jews were "injurious presents".^[205] Contrarily, in four consecutive articles, Odobescu advocated "the naturalization of the Israelites", describing the Romanians as traditionally tolerant people.^[206] The antisemites among the "Reds" conserved one victory: although pressured to emancipate the Jews, the PNL government created such subterfuges as to make emancipation unlikely.^[207] The game of wits between Romania and the West was openly acknowledged by Rosetti's press. On 25 December 1881, he commented inRomânul: "Happily the Roumanians may now congratulate themselves on having solved, in favour of the nation, the most burning and dangerous question, and that, we can now own, in a way contrary to the manifest will of the Powers and to the very spirit of the Treaty of Berlin" (as quoted in 1903 byWilliam Evans-Gordon).^[208]

Meanwhile, the war had brought back into focus the Aromanians ofMacedonia (broadly defined). Dimitrie Brătianu, who sympathized with the Aromanian pressure groups in Bucharest, called on Romania to finance the Aromanian emancipation effort. In aRomânul piece, he announced that: "The Romanians on the other side of the Danube know that they are Romanian, wish to remain Romanian and rely on our moral support when it comes to conserving their national identity. [...] There is no deed more worthy, more pleasing onto God, than that of extending our hands to those brothers of ours who are lacking in spiritual sustenance, of giving them the power to express their thoughts in the language of our parents."^[209]

Romania held itsfirst election as an independent country during 1879. Rosetti's role in the campaign was important, since he controlled the PNL's electoral committee and, the "Whites" contended, tried his hand atelectoral fraud.^[200] According to one account: "Following the war of independence, the civic guard became an instrument of political manipulation placed in liberal hands."^[210]

The anti-Austrian radicals were again suspected of being Russia's connection in Romania. On the first day of 1880, theDeutsche Revue published a polemical essay by Rosetti's lifelong rival, Maiorescu. Speaking for the entire "White" leadership, theJunimist doyen alleged that, after the Berlin Treaty, the Rosettists were essentially Romanian Russophiles.^[211] Together with the Russophile lobbyistGrigore M. Sturdza,Românul chided Maiorescu for insinuating that Romania's alliance with France was a disadvantageous complication—the resulting scandal created a rift between theJunimists and the other "White" clubs.^[212]Românul was sarcastic about the "White" effort to set up a monolithicConservative Party, in answer to the PNL, noting that the resulting group was still divided into three factions.^[213]

Nevertheless, some channels of communication still existed betweenRomânul and theJunimists.Moses Gaster, the Jewish scholar,Junimist sympathizer, and friend of Eminescu, wrote for Rosetti's paper during the late 1870s.^[214] A more vocal new arrival was critic, novelist and economistNicolae Xenopol, who abandoned theJunimea cause to attack Eminescu directly, and who eventually took up a position asRomânul editor (1882).^[215]

The debates on foreign policy prolonged themselves well after Ion Brătianu formed his new PNL government. This happened soon after Carol and the Conservative Party proclaimed the country to be the "Kingdom of Romania". By raising the issue of Russian involvement in Romania's politics, Maiorescu and the "White" establishment effectively pressured the mainstream PNL-ists into acknowledging this change of status.^[216]

C. A. Rosetti dissented. In his view, the Kingdom's proclamation was an awkward, barely constitutional, development. A special act confirming Carol's styling as "King",Românul proposed, was redundant, because the previous title "means sovereign, therefore not just Prince, but also King and Emperor".^[217] Embarrassed by the substance of Rosetti's remarks, Brătianu extended his hand to theJunimists, and, instead of a new land reform, promised to enrich the peasants through the rural capitalism of "agricultural bargains" (tocmeli agricole).^[218]Românul soon became the voice of Rosetti's one-man-opposition. Dismissed by the mainstream PNL-ists as melodramatic, Rosetti's paper announced: "Against this impotent and neurotic government, that has proven capable of committing all sorts of dastardly deeds, but, during all these years, has not been able to provide this country with anything worth her pride, that has stirred so many tears in the Romanian consciousness, but has not provoked a single minute of national enthusiasm, that is only capable of stuffing its own favorites and kick-starting its political machine at election time—against this government we must rise up, big and small, determined and unyielding."^[219] Through the voice of its new co-editor,I. C. Bibicescu,Românul warned that "Christian" Romania was on a downward demographic spiral. Sparking a press debate, Bibicescu noted the comparatively lowermortality rate of Romanian Jews, and suggested proto-eugenic measures such as a state-run "Committee on Hygiene".^[220]

Still,Românul participated in the effort to legitimize Ion C. Brătianu's prudent foreign policy: it republished aDaily Telegraph essay, which promised a return of the Budjak to those who maintained independence from Russia and did not provoke Austria-Hungary.^[221] Like all the liberal left,Românul had also renounced republicanism. Rosetti voted in favor of granting Carol a largedemesne and, in hisRomânul articles, produced statements such as "the throne is an altar" (according to the anti-Rosettist observer Georges Bibesco, the 1848 revolution was thus nullified by its very instigators).^[222] The newspaper celebrated theQueen-Consort,Elisabeth (Carmen Sylva), as "a Poet, a Mother and a Queen", "the [world's] most beautiful light".^[223]

One major obstacle that I. Brătianu still faced was precisely the anarchist and socialist circle supported byRomânul. Russia had conditioned the kingdom's recognition in exchange for a rapid repression of the "nihilists"; Brătianu reluctantly obeyed.^[224] On 19 March 1881,Românul quoted in full the premier's menacing statements, according to which the Russian refugees were "louts" and "vagabonds" who had overstayed their welcome.^[225] Also targeted byRomânul, the Hungarian refugees of Bucharest kept an inventory of its insults. According to theirBukaresti Híradó paper, Rosetti's men had referred to the Hungarians as "vandals, savages, heartless, incapable of learning", and to their homeland as a "barbaric" country.^[124][163]

Românul was especially upset that Austria-Hungary conditioned Romania's access to theinternationalized Danube system, equating Austrian policies with bullying and blackmail.^[226] Rosetti gave some backing to a Transylvanian nationalist league called Romanian Irredenta, or Carpathians Society, that militated for a "Daco-Romanian Empire", suggested overthrowing the King, and managed to attract in its ranks the Bukovina-born Eminescu.^[227] However, the radical leader's anti-Hungarianism was fluctuating, and he casually recognized the merits ofBukaresti Híradó publisher Lajos Vándory.^[124][163] In the end, the PNL and the newspaper also tolerated Austria's direct involvement on the Romanian stretch of the Danube. In his editorial, Rosetti wrote: "Those who can makejustified and opportune concessions [Rosetti's italics] are often more securely set on their path than those who flaunt their daring and noisy opposition."^[228]

By August 1881, when it celebrated its 25th anniversary,Românul had reconciled with the Brătianu PNL-ists. Made Brătianu'sInterior Minister, Rosetti even toasted to the Premier.^[229] The anniversary banquet, held at theNational Theatre Bucharest, was a major affair: the building was donned inRomânul memorabilia, and dinner was cooked by master chef Jean Babtisin Mars (including meals invented for the occasion, such as theRomânul Salad).^[230] The PNL fissures were temporarily sealed, andRomânul suggested that, given its reform program, "the future generations could never be grateful enough" to the reunified liberal party.^[231] The period was one of apparent prosperity. After the creation of theBucharest Stock Exchange in 1882,Românul was hosting thestock quotes, as furnished by the Popp bankers ofHanul cu Tei.^[232] A twenty-year-oldTake Ionescu, later known as political representative of the prosperous middle class, was during those years a reporter atRomânul.^[233]

By then, despite the growing marginalization of Rosettist left-wingers,Românul was being popularly identified with Brătianu's program ofstate capitalism. This interval brought some of Eminescu's most violent attacks, which repeatedly suggest imprisoning,institutionalizing or even hanging the Rosettists, as "filibusters" or "parasites".^[234] Under Costinescu and Maiorescu,Românul andJunimea were again quarreling with each other on literary subjects. In aRomânul article of February 1882, N. Xenopol stated the case for a revolution in Romanian letters, endorsing theliterary realism of a dissidentJunimist,Ioan Slavici; he also began a bitter dispute with Eminescu, which reverberated in the liberal newspapers.^[215] Amused by the wrongly attributed cultural references inRomânul, Eminescu mocked its writers for not even mastering theopéra bouffe, let alone classical literature.^[169]

The Rosettists repeatedly tried, and failed, to push their new maximal political agenda, comprising:election reform, completefreedom of the press, independentmagistrates and professionalsub-prefects.^[235] The main objective, stated by Rosetti in his editorials, was to erase the electoral law and its constitutional basis. His rationale was that the legislators' oversight had rendered the electoral process entirely corrupt, always favoring the rich.^[236]Românul took up this campaign, proposing to merge the electoral colleges into one, thus doing away with thecensus suffrage.^[200][237] It also vehiculated its director's ideas about modifying the other sections of his own 1866 Constitution: renouncing the "Kingdom" title, fully incorporating Northern Dobruja, creating a legislative commission from legal specialists, and even disestablishing the Citizens' Guard.^[200] The notion of eliminating the 1st college, representing the country's elite, was attacked by the Conservatives as unsound;^[200][238] the PNL as a whole picked up on the proposal, arguing that "Romania's new social and political context" had elevated the standing of regular Romanian voters, but it still would not follow Rosetti on granting voting rights to all literate men.^[239]

C. A. Rosetti gave up his position as Interior Minister, and resigned his post in the Deputies' Chamber, astonished that the PNL was ignoring his main proposals.^[240] Having come under fire from his own party colleagues, who objected to his vehemence, he left the country, assigning leadership of his newspaper to Costinescu.^[239] When he returned in mid-1883, the PNL had been segmented into a ruling party and the anti-reform "United Opposition". The Rosettist deputies were vital for the Brătianu cabinet, and a compromise was reached between them: voting rights were extended to cover the urban and rural middle class; distinct colleges were preserved, but reconfigured.^[241] New-found monarchism, objections about the king's title, and the old cause of Romanianism were tied together in Rosetti's discourse. During a public function, he called Carol the "kingof the Romanians", thus generating a new diplomatic freeze between Romania and Austria-Hungary.^[242]

Rosetti yielded in exchange for guarantees that the less wealthy voters be protected against intimidation, while Costinescu acknowledged that the radicals never had "a clear idea" of what reform they would propose.^[236] With their acquiescence, measures were also taken to prevent peasants from losing (or even trading) their plots, the Citizens' Guard was disestablished, and the Kingdom retained its full insignia.^[243] As leader of the "United Opposition", Dimitrie Brătianu had moved away from both hisRomânul comrades and his own brother, suggesting that the electoral reform was flawed, and seeking to increase the overall share of middle class voters; another dissident PNL-ist,George D. Vernescu, criticized theRomânul proposals as all toopopulist.^[244]

During the late 1870s and early 1880s,Românul was still involved in the major cultural events. Damé was the main theater chronicler, noted for his coverage ofErnesto Rossi's Romanian tour (January 1878).^[245] He was later involved in a dispute with the fellow liberal poet and dramatistAlexandru Macedonski, exposing Macedonski's stage-writing as heavily indebted toÉmile Augier.^[246]

In 1883, news broke out of Eminescu's rapid fall into mental illness, andRomânul lost a rival. Macedonski being popularly identified as the author of an epigram celebrating the demise of "poet X". Agitated byGrigore Ventura, public opinion turned against Macedonski, who was left to defend himself by means ofRomânul (9 August 1883): "I do not feel I own anybody explanations as to the subjects of my epigrams, since my addressees are only designated with Xes".^[247]

In 1884, the friendship between Premier Brătianu and Rosetti came to its foreseeable end. On 12 January, when the radicals again proposed a quasi-universal suffrage, Brătianu dismissed them as people with "unbalanced faculties".^[248] Unable to persuade the party into following his command, Rosetti withdrew, formalizing his split with the PNL and takingRomânul back into the field of independent politics.^[249] This left Brătianu in full control of liberal policies—a period known to his adversaries, and to later critics, as the "Vizierate".^[250]Gogu Cantacuzino's "Democratic Union" youth also split up: while Mircea Rosetti adopted his father's skepticism,^[251] Cantacuzino modernized the PNL's protectionist agenda, and managed the leading National Liberal newspaper,Voința Națională, in partnership with theBrătianu family.^[252] The latter gazette also enlisted contributions from the former Rosettists Caragiale, N. Xenopol^[253] and Damé.^[254]

A new generation of writers took over atRomânul, including Rosetti's surviving sons—the eldest, Mircea, had died in 1882.^[255] Vintilă, who was appointed editor-in-chief by his father, and Horia, who assisted him at times, preserved the newspaper's socialist flavor. In 1885,Românul organized a Bucharest festival in memory of the Paris Commune,^[255] and called on its readers to validate its opposition to the PNL by organizing a public protest.^[179] It was also noted for criticizing the PNL government's renewed attacks on the socialist clubs of Moldavia, describing I. Brătianu's stance aspurtare nechibzuită ("immoderate behavior").^[256] Its commitment to an immediate single college, and to universal suffrage in the long run, were invoked in its support of theright to strike.^[257]

Also joiningRomânul's editorial staff were socialist novelistConstantin Mille, lawyer-folkloristDumitru Stăncescu,^[258] historianGeorge Ionescu-Gion,^[259] Transylvanian agitatorIoan Russu-Șirianu,^[260] and, for just one month, leftist opinion-makerConstantin Bacalbașa (previously affiliated withTelegraful).^[261] Another collaborator wasDumitru Rosetti Tescanu: aninternational socialist (but also aJunimist),^[262] he published forRomânul a brochure with demands for a fully representative single college.^[257]

Although employed on the Premier's staff,^[263] N. Xenopol was still one of theRomânul editors, arranging a meeting between C. A. Rosetti and the celebratedBelgian economistÉmile de Laveleye. Laveleye (who sees "Le Romanul" as Romania's "Liberal Progressist paper") notes that the radical doyen was overall happy with the country's constitutional regime, since it still kept up with the "peaceful" Belgian example.^[264]

The newspaper fared badly, losing its offices (the Rosetti townhouse) to a fire, and running heavy debts.^[85] Under Vintilă Rosetti,Românul established its own printing press (purchasing the enterprise of C. Petrescu Conduratu and renting the townhouse ofConstantin Barozzi) and signed a distribution contract withHavas, the international news agency.^[179] The offices were rebuilt with state funds, provided by the Lower Chamber in homage to its former President.^[82]

C. A. Rosetti died in April 1885, having just turned down an offer to stand in the partial elections atCraiova.^[3] A huge crowd, comprising the regular readers ofRomânul, reportedly followed the coffin in a public procession toBellu cemetery.^[265] The newspaper received a large supply of commiserations coming in from readers or former employees, calling the deceased an "illustrious democrat" and his death "a public calamity".^[266] A copy was placed on Rosetti's coffin at the Rosetti family crypt.^[267]

The paper was entirely distanced from the PNL, and rallied with the "United Opposition". Against theVoința Națională wing, Vintilă Rosetti and D. Brătianu claimed to represent the "true" National Liberals, suggesting that all notable PNL-ists had perished with C. A. Rosetti.^[268] Meanwhile, the ex-JunimistGeorge Panu and his gazetteLupta also picked up the Rosettist banner, claiming to be Romania's last radical club.^[269]

Românul carried on with some of its traditional preoccupations. Its ongoing criticism of the ruling class as "boyars" was perceived as anachronistic, including by some of C. A. Rosetti's friends.^[270] During 1886, it focused on theBulgarian crisis which looked to be escalating into a new Russo-Turkish War. The gazette then reported on Romania's rapprochement with Austria-Hungary, a policy that seemed to offer the only guarantee in case of a north to south invasion by Russia.^[271] Around 1889, activistPanait Mușoiu and journalist Ion Catina, founders of socialist reviewMunca, were especially active in persuadingRomânul and the other liberal gazettes to publish positive news about the activity of "workers' clubs".^[272] During those years,Românul resumed its monitoring of Austro-Hungarian affairs, and specifically theTransylvanian Memorandum crisis. Like other Bucharest newspapers, it attacked the moderate leadership of theTransylvanian Romanian Party, and especiallyVicențiu Babeș, for having hesitated in condemningMagyarization policies.^[273] However, the newspaper was perceived as less political and scientific than its earlier versions, with readers complaining that it was publishing too much fiction.^[179]

Românul welcomed the creation of aRomanian Social Democratic Workers' Party (PSDMR), which included some of its former staff writers. It gave positive coverage to the group's founding congress of March 1893, noting especially that the socialists promised to solve the Transylvanian question peacefully, "once the working classes will be masters of their fates".^[274]

From early 1894,Românul was co-opted into supporting the PSDMR's own campaign for universal suffrage. Vintilă Rosetti's offices hosted the reunion of PSDMR-ists,Adevărul democrats,Evenimentul liberals, and left-wingagrarian factions. The resulting League for Universal Suffrage included, among others, V. Rosetti himself,Alexandru Ionescu,Vasile Kogălniceanu andIoan Nădejde.^[275] As a parliamentarian, Rosetti backed the project each new time it was submitted, in 1895, 1896 and 1897—it gathered, at most, 45 from 100 possible votes.^[276]

The effort was made difficult from the start: George Panu's anti-PNL radicals were more interested in supporting the Conservatives, while the peasant activistConstantin Dobrescu-Argeș stood accused of embezzlement.^[277] However, Vasile Kogălniceanu attached himself to theRomânul offices, and was its managing editor until 1897.^[278] HisRomânul articles of 1895 were a strange occurrence, given the prevalent pro-Transylvanian agenda of the liberal milieus: Kogălniceanu proposed a union between Romania and Hungary, with increased rights for all ethnic groups.^[279]

By that time, Vintilă Rosetti was being perceived as a champion of both the working class and the destitute aristocrats.^[280] Although they complained about the disorganization of the Romanian press, the Rosetti brothers were absent from efforts to create a journalists' trade union—unlike their colleagues atTimpul,Voința Națională,Adevărul,Universul orEpoca.^[179] Horia Rosetti was for a while deputy in the1895 legislature, and was injured by rioting students, shortly before the fall of the secondDimitrie Sturdza cabinet.^[281] He no longer focused on political journalism, but on his main passion: the sport offencing. His career in sports was crowned by his participation as a referee in the1900 Olympic challenge and his appointment as coach of the national fencing team.^[282]

Românul was slowly leaving the central stage of Romanian journalism. In 1899, it switched back from a daily to a weekly, was a bimonthly between 1901 and 1903, and, in its final edition, was again published once a week.^[16] The staff was enthusiastic when, in 1900, young journalistConstantin Al. Ionescu-Caion resumed the attack onJunimea. A contributor, N. Ținc, was convinced by Caion's faint proof of Caragiale's plagiarism, assessing that theJunimist "megalomaniacs" were morally bankrupt (the editorial was not published by Vintilă Rosetti, but survives in theRomânul archives).^[283]

Although moribund, the Rosettis' newspaper still offered a venue for young talents, such as Jewish journalistHenric Streitman.^[284] Caion himself was soon co-opted as the main editor. In January 1905, shortly before Rosetti's newspaper closed shop, he foundedRomânul Literar ("The Literary Romanian"). Caion's gazette, which was primarily a literary venue of theSymbolist movement, denied being a successor ofRomânul, but still numbered its issues in succession to Rosetti's.^[285]

During its 1881 anniversary banquet,Românul could claim to have been the longest-standing Romanian periodical to date;^[286] it was, overall, one of the most long-lived newspapers in Romania's history.^[3] In various ways, it was already a landmark of Romanian journalism: writing in 1972, historian Vasile Netea calledRomânul "the Romanians' first modern newspaper, a real school of journalism for the new generations of writers and publicists."^[25] Already under C. A. Rosetti, the gazette claimed various firsts in Romanian press history, most notably the introduction of a black border around the more importantobituary pieces.^[287]

Before the liberal establishment was divided into competing factions,Ghimpele cartoonists celebrated Rosetti and I. Brătianu as the champions of universal suffrage, progress and liberty.^[288] Rosetti invented his playful and patheticalter ego,Berlicoco ("Pinecone"), referencing his novel hairdo and later used as his regular nickname.^[289]

A picturesque aspect of the newspaper was its recourse toantiquated spellings, overly reliant ondeep orthography: Romanian words spelled in accordance withLatin,Italian orFrench rules. In combination with grandiloquent speech, a Rosettist giveaway, these produced a language that was significantly different from the generalizedphonemic orthography endorsed byJunimea.^[290] The early standard atRomânul was to render the/ɨ/ sound in its own name, and in all references to the "Romanian"endonym, as a plaina, highlighting theRoman origins of the Romanians.^[291] For unknown reasons, it often replaced the lettero with thedigraphuă.^[292]Românul also used an extraneous-e suffix in various common nouns, and modified thegrammatical article accordingly—for instance, C. A. Rosetti wasfondatorele, editorele și redactorele acestui ziare liberale (forfondatorul, editorul și redactorul acestui ziar liberal, "the founder, editor and director of this here liberal newspaper").^[293][294]

Modern philologists have therefore described the standard Rosettist discourse as a "macaronic" dialect,^[294] or a constant stream of "declamatory verbiage".^[295] As early as the 1860s,Eugeniu Carada amused himself imitating his patron's verbose rhetoric, which he already found counterproductive.^[50] In a 1902 retrospective,Titu Maiorescu feigned bewilderment that, given their arguments, theRomânul "rhetors" had not been committed to psychiatric wards by their own families.^[293] According to literary criticIoana Pârvulescu,Românul was "written in a cumbersome Latinized orthography and [was] outstandingly pathetic".^[17] She also includesRomânul among the period newspapers guilty of "horrific [grammatical] errors", with such "bizarre" spelling choices as to "make all assertions look ridiculous."^[292] Conversely, in his biographical profile of Rosetti,George Călinescu reads an "inflated" but coherent layer under the unusual orthographic choices.^[85] Once Vintilă Rosetti took over as manager,Românul took steps to rationalize its orthography and comb through the ungrammatical excesses.^[296]

Sculpted byWladimir Hegel and inaugurated in 1903, the C. A. Rosetti Monument, Bucharest, shows its subject holding a copy ofRomânul.^[26] ANational Library of Romania fund, mysteriously kept under C. A. Rosetti's aliasDinu Rosetti,^[3] comprises most of the letters addressed toRomânul. Even after its founder's death, the newspaper was known outside Romania: "Romanul of Bucharest" is mentioned byJules Verne in hisspeculative novel of 1889,The Purchase of the North Pole. It is the only Romanian title cited among the press reports on the central event: the planned modification of theaxial tilt.^[297]

An entirely negative image of the Rosettist tribune was reported by the core group ofJunimist conservatives. Loosely associated withJunimea, but previously a conservative figure among the 1848 revolutionaries, poetVasile Alecsandri set the tune for this polemic when, in the 1860s, he suggested thatRomânul had introduced Wallachians to the journalistic practice of character assassination. His lyrics make a transparent reference to Rosetti,aștept să văd sub trăsnet hidoasa pocitură / Care-a sădit în țară invidie și ură ("I await to see a bolt striking down the hideous fright / Who has planted envy and hatred in this soil").^[298][299] Alecsandri also stated his disgust at the proliferation of "Romanianist" advertising, citingRomânul as a prime example—"The Romanian newspaper", on par with "Romanian tailor", "Romanian tavern" or "Romaniancașcaval".^[19]

Rosetti's traditional enemy,Ion Heliade Rădulescu, preserved a similar image of Rosetti asMusiu Rapace ("Monsieur Rapacious"), "daubed in red, a new upstart and a so-called advocate of the peasants".^[300] His lampoons also introduce the long-standingad hominem of Rosetti "the frog eyes", in reference to his embarrassingexophthalmia.^[298][301] Such irony against the Rosettists inspired Rădulescu's discipleGrigore H. Grandea, who caricatured Rosetti as the extravagantPoruchik Baboi, a hanger-on among the "48-ists".^[302]

As early as 1876, the enragedMihai Eminescu responded toRomânul criticism with virulently satirical poems, many of which were not published in Eminescu's own lifetime. Referring to the newspaper asPruncul ("The Infant", fromPruncul Român), he introducesBonifaciu Florescu as an "oakum-brained" dwarf, "Bonifaciu thehomunculus", andV. A. Urechia as the "pooch" son of a decadent aristocrat, his mind a "lively ruin".^[303]Pantazi Ghica was also mentioned for his dilettantism, but also ridiculed for his "50-oka" ofkyphosis.^[304] Against Florescu's praise of formal purity, Eminescu defends raw poetry, with an argument which took its definitive form in the 1884 piece "To My Critics":

Eminescu's bile is specifically aimed at theRomânul writers and the Rosettists in the better known "Third Letter", part of which is a versified version of Eminescu's xenophobic manifesto. In one draft of the poem, the Rosettist "Reds" are referred to as "the stupid mass" of "plebs" andstârpitură ("runts").^[306] In later versions, focus falls on Pantazi Ghica as a hunchback and acuckold,^[307] but especially so on C. A. Rosetti, portrayed as the absolute worst political manipulator. In Eminescu's diatribe, Rosetti, orReb Berlicoco, is the most seductive of National Liberal demagogues, a ruling class comprising "the mouth-breathers, the windbags, the nincompoops and thegoitred".^[308] Taking its cue from Alecsandri, Eminescu's poem consecrates Rosetti's portrait as a "hideous fright" with "frog eyes".^{[293][298][309]}

Although Rosetti did not bear Eminescu a grudge,^[298][310] an entire critical school, beginning with the leftist republicanGeorge Panu, condemned the poem's harshness. After attending the first reading of the "Letter", Panu broke his friendship with the author and ended hisJunimea affiliation.^[311] For the socialistConstantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea, Rosetti was a traveling companion, and the poet's "contempt" for the radicals, incomprehensible.^[312] As argued by Șerban Cioculescu, the "Third Letter" rhetoric was hopelessly outdated: Eminescu's main quarrel was with the more enterprising National Liberals, rather than with the left-leaning Rosettists; moreover, Rosetti was no longer the "internal Plevna" conspirator vilified by the classical conservatives.^[313] Cioculescu speculates: "Had Eminescu lived longer, perhaps he would have revised his indictment."^[314] Likewise, Călinescu describes Eminescu's anti-Rosettism as "essentially unfair", and proof of the poet's "growing irritability",^[315] while Pârvulescu finds it an "enormous injustice" that Eminescu did not recognize any of Rosetti's merits.^[293] Thenativist andracialist undertones of Eminescu's poem, wherein the Rosettists come off as "the thick-neckedBulgars, the thin-nosedGreeklings", remain especially controversial.^[298][316]

Once he reinvented himself as aJunimist, Rosetti's former pupilIon Luca Caragiale contributed a milder, but culturally poignant and unrelenting, critique of "Red" demagoguery. As he himself noted, with barely restrained irony, Rosetti's political rallies of the 1870s were "the classical school of liberalism", destined to become utterly incomprehensible for future generations, and as such worthy of being recorded in print.^[317]

Caragiale's playO noapte furtunoasă, which mocks the Citizens' Guard as a docile instrument of the "Reds", also introducesRică Venturiano as a caricature of the Rosettist youth, speaking and writing in macaronic sequences, and editing the ardently republican gazetteVocea Patriotului Naționale ("Voice of the National Patriot")—quite possibly a direct reference toRomânul.^[318] Through narrative episodes about the tribulations of a "Cordwainer Tache", the author depicts the Guard's methods of pestering the conservative voters.^[319] In the subtext, the play directly references Caragiale's first avatar, that of "Red" newspaperman, or at the very least his friend and rivalFrédéric Damé.^[149] As the author explained in old age:Mă, Rică sunt eu ("Lo, I myself am Rică").^[320]

Ironically,Românul advertised the play, unaware of its content,^[321] and Rosetti even attended the premiere together with his family (January 1879).^[322] The newspaper was afterward dismissive of Caragiale's text. For theRomânul chroniclerNicolae Xenopol,O noapte furtunoasă was rather inconsistent, and Venturiano an "entirely fantasized" creation.^[323] Damé himself was infuriated by the play's message, and actually found Venturiano to be a positive model of the Romanian youth.^[149]

In March 1879, Caragiale returned with other pieces against the radicals, including mock promises that, if created a republic, Romania would be run by the Citizens' Guards and the tavern-keepers, "Patriotism" would be a skilled profession, and Rosetti would be instituted a "Chief Rabbi".^[324] In Caragiale's polemical articles, the references to Rosetti's religious-like authority in the PNL are coupled with amise en abyme of Rosettist electioneering.^[200] Writing forTimpul in the early 1880s, he emphasizes the dreariness of parliamentary life, with specific references to Rosetti, P. Ghica, Urechia and other maverick PNL-ists.^[325] Further ridicule of the Rosettist program steals the scene in the 1880Conu Leonida față cu reacțiunea, which also samples from Berlicoco's speeches.^[200] The play shows a clueless, but patriotic and republican, entrepreneur, who worships Garibaldi as his personal saint and readsRomânul-like propaganda.^[326]

The anti-Rosettist joke is again taken up in Caragiale's other main comedy,O scrisoare pierdută, with the matured National Liberal andyellow journalistNae Cațavencu,^[200][327] a prototype of anti-Junimism.^[328] The entire play has been read as the clash between two clienteles, one Rosettist and the other pro-Brătianu.^[200][329] Nevertheless, Caragiale also paid Rosetti the occasional compliment, calling him "that restless and talented newspaperman" (1889).^[330]

In other prose fragments, the formerAlegătorul Liber journalist retells embarrassing anecdotes about his Rosettist colleagues. One of them claims that the "Red" conspirators of 1866 were blackmailed by a tavern-keeper, having callously signed their names onto anIOU.^[331] Some of Caragiale's later articles, published in the mid-1890s by theJunimist sheetEpoca, are tongue-in-cheek recollections of his youth, quoting at length from the verbose appeals of his Rosettist idols.^[332] The 1898 sketchIstoria se repetă ("History Repeating") is about the idealism ofRomânul seniors, such as co-editor Tache Pandrav, who demanded "electoral freedom", and therealpolitik of Rosettist electoral agents: when bidding for the radicals' seat inPrahova County, Pandrav is informed by his own party that he needs "ahakham's blessing" from Rosetti personally.^[333]

Wikimedia Commons has media related toRomânul.

• (in French)La France, le prince Couza et la liberté en Orient, Chez les Principaux Libraires, Paris, 1864 (digitized by theBibliothèque nationale de FranceGallica digital library)
• The American Annual Cyclopædia and Register of Important Events of the Year 1868,D. Appleton & Company, New York City, 1869
• (in Romanian)"Constantinu A. Rosetti", inAmiculu Familiei, Nr. 4/1884, p. 53–54 (digitized by theBabeș-Bolyai UniversityTranssylvanica Online Library)
• (in Romanian)"Inmormentarea lui C. A. Rosetti", inAmiculu Familiei, Nr. 4/1884, p. 77–79, 82–83
• Tiberiu Avramescu, "Un cavaler rătăcitor pe drumurile libertății: Titus Dunka", inMagazin Istoric: part I, July–August 1968, p. 141–147; part II: September 1968, p. 80–83
• (in French) Dinu Balan,"«La question juive» dans la premiere partie de l'anée 1868. Une perspective conservatrice: la gazetteTerra", in theȘtefan cel Mare University of SuceavaCodrul Cosminului, Nr. 14 (2008), p. 63–76
• (in French)Dan Berindei,"Opinion publique et politique extérieure en Roumanie de l'indépendance à la veille de la Guerre mondiale", inOpinion publique et politique extérieure en Europe. I. 1870–1915. Actes du Colloque de Rome (13–16 février 1980). Publications de l'École française de Rome, 54,École française de Rome, Rome, 1981, p. 411–425 (republished byPersée Scientific Journals)
• (in French) Georges Bibesco,Roumanie. 1843–1859. Règne de Bibesco. Lois et décrets, 1843–1848, insurrection de 1848, histoire et légende, Vol. II, E. Plon, Nourrit & Co., Paris, 1894
• Lucian Boia,
  • "Coaliția de la Mazar Pașa", inMagazin Istoric, November 1973, p. 78–83
  • Istorie și mit în conștiința românească,Humanitas, Bucharest, 2000.ISBN 973-50-0055-5
• (in Romanian) Liviu Brătescu, "Relațiile româno‑ruse (1878‑1888). Tensiuni, conflicte și încercări de reconciliere", in George Enache, Arthur Tuluș, Cristian Căldăraru, Eugen Drăgoi (eds.),La frontierele civilizațiilor. Basarabia în context geopolitic, economic, cultural și religios, Editura Partener &University of Galați, Galați, 2011, p. 113–134.ISBN 978-973-1914-16-9
• George Călinescu,Istoria literaturii române de la origini pînă în prezent,Editura Minerva, Bucharest, 1986
• Ion Luca Caragiale, Al. Dobrescu,Moftul român,Editura Moldova, Iași, 1991.ISBN 973-9032-32-X
• Șerban Cioculescu,Caragialiana,Editura Eminescu, Bucharest, 1974.OCLC 6890267
• (in Romanian)Constantin Cubleșan, "Începuturile romanului realist românesc: N. Xenopol", in the1 December University of Alba IuliaPhilologica Yearbook, 2008 (Vol. I), p. 19–26
• Vasile Ene, Ion Nistor,Studii eminesciene,Editura Albatros, Bucharest, 1971.OCLC 3220293; see:
  • Șerban Cioculescu, "Aspecte de critică socială eminesciană", p. 115–133
  • Alexandru Piru, "Satira eminesciană", p. 186–218
• William Evans-Gordon,The Alien Immigrant,W. Heinemann, London, 1903 (digitized by theInternet Archive)
• Georgeta Filitti,
  • "Un liberal uitat: Gogu Cantacuzino", inMagazin Istoric, January 2000, pp. 11–15
  • (in Romanian)"Românul", in the Mihail Sadoveanu City LibraryBiblioteca Bucureștilor, Nr. 3/2006, p. 7–9
• Juliana Geran Pilon,The Bloody Flag. Post-Communist Nationalism in Eastern Europe. Spotlight on Romania (Studies in Social Philosophy & Policy No. 16),Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick & London, 1992.ISBN 1-56000-620-X
• (in Romanian) Tiberiu Horațiu Gorun, "Modernizarea României și revizuirea Constituției de la 1866", in theUniversity of OradeaAnale. Istorie – Arheologie XVII, 2007, p. 59–73
• (in Romanian) Hilda Hencz,Bucureștiul maghiar: scurtă istorie a maghiarilor din București de la începuturi până în prezent, Editura Biblioteca Bucureștilor, Bucharest, 2011, p. 185.ISBN 978-973-8369-97-9
• (in Romanian)Nicolae Iorga,"Un cercetător al Romăniei în vremea războiului de independență", inRevista Istorică, Nr. 10–12/1938, p. 365
• (in Romanian)Mugur Isărescu,Surica Rosentuler, Sabina Marițiu,Restitutio 3. Viața și opera lui Eugeniu Carada,National Bank of Romania, 2003
• Nicolae Liu, "La France de la guerre, la France de la paix et la France de la Révolution dans la mentalité roumaine", in Paul Viallaneix, Jean Ehrard (eds.),La bataille, l'armée, la gloire, 1745–1871: Actes du Colloque international de Clermont-Ferrand, Vol. I, 1985,Blaise Pascal University, Clermont-Ferrand, 1985, p. 483–492
• Vasile Maciu, "Un pasionat luptător pentru Unire: B. P. Hasdeu", inMagazin Istoric, April 1970, p. 23–27
• Beatrice Marinescu,Șerban Rădulescu-Zoner, "1877. Calendar bucureștean", inMagazin Istoric, 1977 (various issues)
• Nora Zizi Munteanu, "Mircea Rosetti—de la pașoptiști la socialiști", inMagazin Istoric, March 1972, p. 27–28
• Vasile Netea,
  • "Rosetteștii", inMagazin Istoric, March 1972, p. 21–26
  • "Mazzini și românii", inMagazin Istoric, November 1972, p. 10–15
• Vasile Niculae, "Liga votului universal", inMagazin Istoric, August 1973, p. 70–73
• Z. Ornea,Junimea și junimismul, Vol. I-II, Editura Minerva, Bucharest, 1998.ISBN 973-21-0562-3
• Ioana Pârvulescu,Lumea ca ziar. A patra putere: Caragiale, Humanitas, Bucharest, 2011.ISBN 978-973-50-2954-8
• Sorin Radu,
  • (in Romanian)"Liberalii și problema reformei electorale în România (1866–1914) (I)", in the 1 December UniversityAnnales Universitatis Apulensis, Series Historica, Nr. 4–5, 2000–2001, p. 131–144
  • (in Romanian)"Reformarea sistemului electoral din România în gândirea conservatoare", in theNational Museum of the UnionApulum Yearbook, Vol. XLII, 2005, p. 367–390
• Ioan Scurtu, "Carol I riscă și... câștigă", inMagazin Istoric, March 2002, p. 28–32
• Geo Șerban, G. Pienescu, "Tabel cronologic", inAlexandru Odobescu, Constantin Măciucă,Pseudo-cynegetikos,Editura Albatros, Bucharest, 1990, p. XV–XX.ISBN 973-24-0038-2
• (in Romanian) Iolanda Sterpu, "Despre personajul absent în comediaO noapte furtunoasă de I. L. Caragiale", in theAlexandru Ioan Cuza UniversityAnale. Literatură LI, 2005, p. 13–18
• Maria Totu, "Garda civică în războiul de independență", inMagazin Istoric, September 1970, p. 77–81
• Constantin N. Velichi, "Coaliția sacră româno–bulgară", inMagazin Istoric, August 1973, p. 74–77
• Tudor Vianu,Scriitori români, Vol. I-II, Editura Minerva, Bucharest, 1970–1971.OCLC 7431692
• (in French) Dumitru Vitcu,"Les dilemmes, les controverses et les conséquences d'une alliance politique conjecturale. Les relations roumaino-russes des années 1877–1878", in theȘtefan cel Mare University of SuceavaCodrul Cosminului, Nr. 14 (2008), p. 77–117

• 1850s establishments in Wallachia
• 1857 establishments in Europe
• 1905 disestablishments in Romania
• Newspapers established in 1857
• Publications disestablished in 1905
• Defunct newspapers published in Romania
• Defunct weekly newspapers
• Newspapers published in Bucharest
• National Liberal Party (Romania)
• Populism in Europe
• Radicalism (historical)
• Romantic nationalism
• Romanian nationalism
• Republicanism in the Kingdom of Romania
• Socialist newspapers published in Romania
• Anti-Hungarian sentiment in Romania
• Culture of Transylvania
• Kingdom of Romania
• History of Bucharest
• Antisemitism in Romania

• Articles with Romanian-language sources (ro)
• Articles with Italian-language sources (it)
• Webarchive template wayback links
• Articles with French-language sources (fr)
• Webarchive template archiveis links
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Use dmy dates from August 2021
• Pages with Romanian IPA
• Commons category link is on Wikidata