Peregrinatio academica

The volume that we present today to the public interested in history is the natural result of the Conference with international participation entitled: Schimbarea de paradigmă din istoria ecleziastică şi cea laică în Transilvania secolului al XVIII-lea (Paradigm Change in the Ecclesiastical and Laic History of Transylvania in the 18^th Century), the first edition, 2009, Alba Iulia. The Conference was organised by ˝1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia – The Department of History and ˝Iuliu Maniu” Centre for Historical and Politological Research of Alba Iulia. The manifestation enjoyed the collaboration with the Union National Museum of Alba Iulia. The Conference financing was ensured by a project mastered by the National Authority for Scientific Research – Bucharest having the support of ˝1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia and Bod Péter Foundation, Alba Iulia (through Szülőföld Alap-Budapest).

The Conference enjoyed the presence of participants from Alba Iulia, Cluj-Napoca, Budapest, Zürich, Szeged and Eger. They represented distinguished universities and research centres in the country and abroad: ˝1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia, University of Zürich, Károli Gáspár University of the Hungarian Reformed Church - Budapest, Babeş-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, University of Szeged, Eszterházy Károly University of Eger, ˝Iuliu Maniu” Centre for Historical and Politological Research, Alba Iulia, the Union National Museum, Alba Iulia, and ˝George Bariţiu” Institute of History of the Romanian Academy, Cluj-Napoca. The Conference lectures and the scientific works of this volume tackle three significant elements of the historiographical paradigm change of Transylvania in the 18^th century: I) Convergences, Divergences and Continuity of Historical Writing; II) Training Centres and the Historiographical Paradigm Change in Transylvania: From Centre to Periphery. European Dimensions; III) Confessional Tolerance and Intolerance as Historiographical Paradigm.

The change of the Transylvanian historiography was – just as the political change manifested itself because of the setting up of the Habsburg domination in the autonomous Principality – a natural result of the pervasion of Enlightenment in this part of Europe. The historiographical paradigm change in Transylvania in the 18^th century followed the social and political modernity (reform) for the carrying out of the desideratum of historiographical modernity. In the beginning of the 18^th century, the convulsive movements carried out in order to integrate the Transylvanian Autonomous Principality within the Habsburg Empire drew upon itself the historiographical crisis. The historical writing introverted itself as defence and conservation measure for the old humanist values inherited especially from the historiography of the Transylvanian Reform. It was for the first time that the Transylvanian conscience crisis seen as reaction to political change became visible, especially in Count Miklós Bethlen’s (1642 – 1716) Autobiography. The melancholy of the past times called up again the attention of the readers fond of history and nobiliary manners having the support of the description of the social and political metamorphosis of Principality in Metamorphosis Transilvaniae written by baron Péter Apor (1676–1752). The solution chosen by the Protestant Transylvanian historiography in defensive and tributary to the idea of conservation was the retreat – the escapism. This was the attitude expressed by nobleman Mihály Cserei (1667-1756), the author of the work The History of Transylvania until 1711. He effectively left his domain and therefore estranged himself from the historical writing. The nobility seemed resigned through a manifestation of expectation for better life and passivity. This behaviour was made official through the words expressed by historian and provincial secretary István Halmágyi (1719–1785): ˝I am sitting on the bottom of a steamer and listen from down there the above waves” - these words pervaded the effects of the absolutist and authoritative policy that called for order and change. The wave of the political change between East and West led to restatements and the redefining of the Orthodox, Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic and, implicitly, Protestant identities that generated the premises of the development and historiographical paradigm change. In historiography (Péter Apor, Péter Bod, György Rettegi’s Memories, Martin Schmeizel) therefore emerged the prototype of the new, integrated noble (homo novus) who submitted himself to new requirements and was partisan of the new barocque fashion (neue Mode). His cultural value, significance and administrative utility were given by the studies abroad (academic pilgrimage, peregrinatio academica) at the Universities of Vienna, Rome, Trnava (Nagyszombat), Leiden, Basel or German Principalities. The culture promoted by this new enlightened spirit raised for discussion the key concepts of the national development, such as: school, administrative reform, and nation, structural ideas for the development of a social, political and religious reform at imperial level. Paradoxically or not, those who promoted the historiographical paradigm change in Transylvania belonged to the nobility and Protestant clergy. The confessional side promoted a direct or indirect (in a low tone) debate between the Counter-Reformation – Catholic Reform and Protestantism throughout the 18^th century. The historiographical paradigm change therefore followed the evolution of the society from baroque to Pre-Enlightenment, and, then, Enlightenment. Within the debate upon the ecclesiastical history, the moment of the religious Union of the Orthodox Romanians with the Church of Rome is very important (Gherontie Cotore) and had significant echoes in the Protestant historiography (Bod, Historia valachorum). Historiographical paradigms emerged with a view to modernising the historical writing and carrying out a real paradigm change. By virtue of the use of history for the administrative Reform of the Empire, the programmes - be them Catholic or Protestant – detached themselves from the confessional side of debate with difficulty. Two fundamental concepts for historiography therefore emerged: the need to ensure the access to archives (Leopold Kollonich, Einrichtungswerk des Königreichs Hungarn, 1689) and the usefulness of the development of an analytical, interrogative method for the material at the disposal (Gábor Hevenesi, Modus materiae conquirendae, pro annalibus ecclesiasticis regni Hungariae, 1694). They were considered real ˝tools” for social Reform achievement and generated the renovation of the historiographical attitude through historia critica – this idea was promoted by Bishop Jacques- Bénigne Bossuet (1627-1704). Protestant historiography followed the Prussian patterns and rallied the utilitarian requirement promoted within society. The traditional flacianism promoted by the Protestant historiography of the Principality adjusted itself to the new political situation and coloured the Jesuit typology of the historical research through the historiography of the state knowledge (Staatenkunde –through Matthias Bél, Ferenc Fóris Otrokocsi, Péter Bod, József Benkő) or the model rendered by Johann Lorenz von Mosheim (1693-1755). The immense effort needed in order to spin the various information and specialization of the historical branches inherently led to the necessity of the idea of associative research in history through Academies and Associations (János Csere Apáczai, Péter Bod). Transylvanian Enlightenment gave birth to new attitudes and historiographical conceptions. The striving for origin research became almost obsessive for this ethnically heterogeneous region. The historians’ intention was to define the national identity and alterity through the social and political argumentation of the idea of a nation (natio). Nevertheless, alterity involved a compromise, historiographical acceptance and confrontation in the spirit of real social and political militantism. The historian of this world that was changed had success only if he was also endowed with the intellectual qualities of the century also reflected in the historical writing: erudition and piety became qualitative attributes for the historiographical debate. The philosophical and theological trends played a major role for the historical personalities’ spiritual modelling. Mention should be made about coccejanism, cartezianism, iozefinism, wolfianism, jansenism and febronianism. They brought an essential contribution to the formation of the spiritual portraits of historiography in the 18^th century. The essential concepts of the structuring of a modern and coherent historical discourse emerged under the influence of the spiritual ideologies that had been accepted and adapted during the study time spent abroad: curiosities (Curiositas), confessional tolerance (Mutua tolerantia), irenicism, critical objectivity etc. The humanist descriptive simplicity of princes’ lives through the new method and concept accumulation evolved through a real paradigm change about the complex historical descriptions under the influence of both the knowledge of state historiography and the Jesuit method of interrogation about the past. The purpose of historiography becomes a real raison d’état. Historiography of the 18^th century started to excel through a political and social argumentative discourse and detached itself from purely confessional causalities. The laicization of historical writing in the century of Enlightenment manifested increased interest for love and the individual’s relation with society, and became a useful element for the Reform of society. The historiographical utilitarianism became the new paradigm of the 18^th century. The paradigm change also manifested through the diversification of the relations between the laic and ecclesiastical historiography. The ecclesiastical historiography wanted to expand the borders of Respublica Christiana towards the boundaries of a new and tolerant Respublica Litteraria. Historical sciences started to specialise themselves throughout their evolution (hence, new fields of activity emerged: auxiliary sciences, literary, ecclesiastical and laic history, cartography, arhondology etc.) Although it did not generate enormous historiographical impiety in Principality, atheism, naturalism and deism renascence in Western Europe became perceptible signs of detachment from the exclusively providential explanation of history. The Transylvanian historiography felt that it was its duty to lead the society from religious community to national identity without the denying of the confessional side. On the contrary, the Transylvanian religiosity was placed in the middle of the fight against the impiety of the century. The Light, the Reason, pervaded the history of Principality through Faith. The historiograhical paradigm change in Transylvania became a reality in the 18^th century owing to this structural change of the historiographical writing.

The organisers want to thank all those who financially got involved in the organisation of the Conference under optimal circumstances and the volume publishing

Botond Gudor