In Search of A.C. Cuza
In Search
of A.C. Cuza
When
Alexandru C. Cuza was born in Iași, Moldavia in 1857, Romania was not yet a unified country
fully freed from Ottoman vassalage.
Turkish rule had not been as direct or oppressive here as in the lower
Balkans, but it left the young state and ancient nation with a host of social
problems. Cuza was a child when
Wallachia and Moldavia were united in 1866, and not yet twenty years old during
the start of the war by which Romania would gain her independence. He would go on to study in France and
earn doctorates in political science and law. In The Romanian road to independence, Frederick
Kellogg describes the mostly economically driven anti-Semitism that existed in
anti-Semitism that existed in the nascent united and independent Romania,
especially in the former principality of Moldavia, when A.C. Cuza came of age:
“Thrifty
Jewish entrepreneurs earned distrust as well as profit from Romanian
aristocrats and peasants. In
Moldavia, Jews were bankers—moneylenders and moneychangers—innkeepers, lessees
of taverns in villages: grocers, rug merchants, peddlers, besides being
artisans—tailors, turners, glass makers, and carpet makers. Romanians reckoned Jewish money lenders
in particular to be dangerous to the social order owing to their pervasive
influence on impoverished farmers and perennially indebted landed proprietors. Boiers, or aristocrats, regarded
commerce and industry to be beneath their dignity, thereby leaving the door
open for their Jewish creditors to seize control of an important segment of the
economy. An additional problem was
the Jewish way of life in Moldavia.
The Jews’ exclusive family circles and non-Romanian customs clearly
identified them as outsiders.
Romanians considered them to be aliens, and some were indeed foreign
subjects protected by one or another of the great powers.”
It
was in this atmosphere of decaying Ottoman suzerainty and Ashkenazi immigration
that anti-Semitism such as A.C. Cuza’s was fostered. Nevertheless, historian Irina Liveneanu has labeled him “the
father of Romanian ant-Semitism,” so influential was he on the younger generation
of Romanians. He later became the
dean and a popular lecturer at the law school in Iași University, and mentored Romanian students who feared the
growing Jewish presence in higher education.
The
most charismatic and influential of these students was Corneliu Zelea
Codreanu. According to Codreanu
scholar Dr. Rebecca Haynes, “Cuza became Codreanu’s godfather and acted as his
mentor when Codreanu was a student at Iași University… In his attitude toward the Jewish minority,
Codreanu was greatly influenced by his godfather, A.C. Cuza.” Together Cuza and Codreanu established
the League of Christian Defense (Liga Apărării
Național Creștine, L.A.N.C.) in
1923. This radical student group
used the swastika as a symbol a full decade before Hitler came to power in
Germany, where both Cuza and the half-German Codreanu had studied.
Internal
administrative politics in the League soured Cuza and Codreanu’s relationship
by 1927, a break which Dr. Haynes attributes also to Cuza’s being — at least at
the time — “willing to work entirely within the parliamentary system. Codreanu seems to have been more
strongly anti-democratic than his mentor, and despised the parliamentary system
as such. It wasn’t until after
Codreanu’s paramilitary approach proved successful that Cuza adopted similar
tactics.
This
has sometimes been unconvincingly interpreted to mean their split occurred
because Codreanu was essentially more violent than Cuza. In fact, Cuza’s own rival militia has
been described by some scholars as more violent than Codreanu’s Iron Guard — at
least while Codreanu was still alive.
According to Ion Antonescu biographer Dennis Deletant, for example, A.C.
Cuza’s lancieri (or “blue shirts”) consisted of nothing but “an army of
thugs,” so in the 1930s, “it was not the Guard that posed the chief threat to
public order.”
A.C.
Cuza’s willingness to work within the parliamentary system paid off, at least
for a time. In the 1930s he formed
a new political party with the poet Octavian Goga, a coalition which was
selected to rule the country by the increasingly autocratic king in response to
Codreanu’s growing popularity.
During the short-lived but influential Goga-Cuza period, anti-Jewish
discriminatory laws and measures were enacted in Romania.
Cuza’s
party was not as popular as Codreanu’s, and the Goga-Cuza government ruled only
briefly in late 1937 and early 1938 before being forced out of power and
replaced by King Carol II’s direct dictatorship. It was this monarchial dictatorship that had Codreanu
imprisoned and assassinated in late 1938.
Corneliu Zelea Codreanu had finally broken the parliamentary system he
so despised, though at the cost of his own life.
In
the 1940s, which saw the Communist takeover of Romania, Cuza had to leave Iași for Transylvania.
However, he was apparently spared the notorious fate of Ion Antonescu,
probably because he was considered too old to stand before a kangaroo
court. Thus robbed of the
martyrdom seen in other, more popular Romanian historical figures, A.C. Cuza
has not generated as much attention among historians as he merits. This may explain the dearth of
information on him in English. He
passed away in 1947. One
particularly hostile source, Romanian-Jewish historian I.C. Butnaru, laments
that “A.C. Cuza died comfortably in his bed and was never judged for his
misdeeds.”
Cuza’s
body of work is not always consistent, except in its unapologetic
anti-Semitism. Cuza’s 1905
publication Nationality in Art, or Nationality in the Arts (the
book deals far more with literature than with the plastic arts), was first
published in complete book form in 1908 and went through several revisions
throughout his lifetime. This book
demonstrates that Cuza began as an Indo-European chauvinist in the vein of
Houston Stewart Chamberlain, although Cuza already included Persians as Aryan
in that book.
In
his 1922 article “The Science of Anti-Semitism,” which was approvingly
reprinted in its entirety in Codreanu’s autobiography For My Legionaries,
Cuza demonstrates that he had by then changed some of his opinions, such as his
appraisal of Islam and the Arabs.
While maintaining his lifelong opposition to “mixture of unrelated
races,” Cuza, in “The Science of Anti-Semitism,” has now abandoned his racial chauvinism
in favor of what might be called pan-antisemitism. However, Nationality in the Arts continued to be
published in several editions long after “The Science of Anti-Semitism” first
appeared.
One
way in which A.C. Cuza remained consistent is that, unlike the traditionally
Orthodox Christian Codreanu and another Cuza associate, unsung insulin
discoverer Dr. Nicolae Paulescu, Cuza was interested in the sort of Bible
revisionism similar to that which would in Germany later be dubbed “Positive
Christianity.” In contrast to
Codreanu and Dr. Paulescu, Cuza’s religious views were more Wagnerian than
Orthodox, though this was not a reason for Cuza and Codreanu’s 1927 falling
out. These ideas appear as early
as Nationality in the Arts and are expanded upon in his 1925 book, The
Teaching of Jesus. The former is an Iranophile book that argues
that Jesus was of Median origin, while the latter book concludes thus: “Peace
be upon you! Fight!”
Comments
Post a Comment