1

Universitatea Creştină “Dimitrie Cantemir” Facultatea de Istorie

ARGENTINA VELEA CRISTINA ATHU

ALEXANDRA MORARU

ENGLISH FOR THE STUDENTS OF THE

FACULTY OF HISTORY

Curs Învăţământul cu frecvenţă redusă

Bucureşti 2011

2

Lector univ. dr. ARGENTINA VELEA

Lector univ. dr. CRISTINA ATHU Lector univ. dr. ALEXANDRA MORARU

ENGLISH FOR THE STUDENTS OF THE FACULTY OF HISTORY

3

CUPRINS

CHAPTER I ............................................................... ...................................................... 7 1. ROMAN BRITAIN ............................................... ...................................................... 7 2. THE LIMITS OF LATINIZATION...................... ...................................................... 19 3. THE END OF SAXON ENGLAND..................... ...................................................... 27 4. THE HUNDRED YEARS’ WAR ......................... ...................................................... 33 5. THE END OF THE MIDDLE AGES...........................................................................50 6. THE BOURGEOIS REVOLUTION (1642–1646)...................................................... 60 7. ON THE AMERICAN WAR................................ ...................................................... 68 8. ROMANIAN HISTORY....................................... ...................................................... 71 9. ANCIENT ACCOUNTS OF ARABIA................. ...................................................... 81 10. BRIEF HISTORY OF ROMANIA ....................... ...................................................... 108 11. SCURTĂ ISTORIE A ROMÂNIEI ...................... ...................................................... 116 12. TIMPURI STRĂVECHI ....................................... ...................................................... 119 13. TRAIAN ................................................................ ...................................................... 122 14. DREPTCREDINCIOSUL VOIEVOD ŞTEFAN CEL MARE SFÂNT................................................................... ...................................................... 125 15. MIHAI VITEAZUL (1593–1601)......................... ...................................................... 133 16. MĂNĂSTIRILE DIN MOLDOVA....................... ...................................................... 141 CHAPTER II ............................................................. ...................................................... 150 GRAMMAR EXPLANATIONS AND EXERCISES . ...................................................... 150 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................ ...................................................... 186

4

CHAPTER I

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 1 1. ROMAN BRITAIN

The Roman occupation intervened between the coming of the Celt and the coming of the Saxon, and delayed the latter for perhaps two hundred years. Celt, Saxon and Dane came over to slaughter or expel the inhabitants and settle in their place, but the Romans came to exploit and govern by right of superior civilization.

........................................................................................ Nor, on the other hand, had the Gauls and Britons an elaborate civilization of their own,

like the inhabitants of the Greek and Oriental lands subject to the Romans’ way. And, therefore, once the Roman conquerors had glutted their first rage for plunder1, their main effort was to induce their Western subjects to assimilate Latin life in all its aspects. Their success with the Gauls was permanent, and became the starting point of modern European history. But in Britain, after a great initial success, they had complete ultimate failure. ‘From the Romans who once ruled Britain’, wrote Haverfield, the great student of the archaeology of the occupation, ‘we Britons have inherited practically nothing’.

In the end the Romans left behind them here just three things of value: the first of these would have amused or shocked Caesar, Agricola or Hadrian, for it was Welsh Christianity; the second was the Roman roads; the third, a by-product of the second, was the traditional importance of certain new city sites, especially that of London. But the Latin life of cites, the villas, the arts, the language and the political organization of Rome vanished like a dream. The greatest fact in the early history of the island is a negative fact – that the Romans did not succeed in permanently Latinizing Britain as they Latinized France.

Julius Caesar won his place in the history of the world by a double achievement – the political renovation of the Roman Empire and its extension into northern Europe. He planted the power of the Mediterranean peoples broad and firm on the north side of the Alps, making Gaul a Latin country for ever.

........................................................................................ In order of time, Caesar’s work in Gaul was the prelude to his work for the Empire as a

whole. And the subjugation of Gaul was only half accomplished when he found himself one day gazing across the Dover Straits. He surveyed the white cliffs like Napoleon, but with other thoughts in his head: for there was nothing to impede a visit to the island and nothing to prevent his safe return; the only question was whether it was worth his while 2 to make the voyage, with more important work on hand3.

His decision to invade Britain was not taken in the hope of setting up a Roman administration on the spot4. He had neither the time nor the men to spare for that5; his military position in Gaul, his political prospects in Italy were too precarious, for the rulers of the Republic loved him as little as the Senators of Carthage had loved Hannibal. But as leader of the opposition party, playing to the gallery in Rome, he had need of6 showy exploits; and he had need of tribute and slaves to enrich his partisans, pay his soldiers and fill his war-chest. An invasion of Britain might answer all these requirements7. Besides, the tribes of North Gaul and South Britain were so closely allied that Gaul would be more submissive if its neighbour were constrained to pay tribute and to fear the mighty name of Rome. At least some first-hand

5

knowledge8 of the politics and geography of the island was necessary for the would-be governors9 of Gaul.

As a military undertaking his first expedition was a failure. He took too small a force10, and scarcely moved ten miles inland from the Dover Straits. In the next year’s invasion on a larger scale11, he won several battles, forded the Thames in the face of the enemy, and penetrated into the Herfordshire territories of Cassivelaunus, King of the Catuvellauni. That tribe was dominant in southern Britain, and the jealousies caused by its hegemony turned some of its rivals and subjects into allies of the Roman invader, both in the time of Julius and a hundred years later during the Claudian conquest. But many of the Britons, including the men of Kent, put up a stout fight against12 Caesar, and though their undisciplined infantry were useless against the ‘legion’s ordered line’, the yellow-haired, athletic aristocracy of the Celt in their scythed chariots13 clattered down the warways of the battle like heroes of Homer, in a manner disconcerting even to the veterans of the Tenth14. The chariot, however, had seen its day15 as a method of warfare16; it had already been abandoned in Celtic Gaul as well as in the Hellenized East, and the British chiefs would have been more truly formidable if they have taught themselves17 to fight as cavalry. But the island never had the luck to be defended by an aristocracy trained to fight from the saddle, until the Norman conquest acclimatized the mediaeval knight.

The expedition of 54 B.C., though not a failure like that of the year before, was no great success. As Cicero complained to his cronies, the famous British gold was secured18 in very inadequate quantities; the slaves were too ignorant to fetch fancy prices19 in the market, and there had been neither the time nor the means to carry off rebellious clans wholesale to the auctioneer, as was Caesar’s practice in Gaul. The expedition had no permanent results, except as a memory on both sides of the Channel. The tribute soon ceased to be paid. The rising of Vercingetorix, which proved the real crisis of the war in Gaul, put an end to Caesar’s further plans for Britain, if he had any20. Then the long civil wars, followed by the reorganization of the Empire under Augustus and Tiberius, gave the distant island a hundred years of respite.

The conquest of Gaul by Julius Caesar, more decidedly than his invasions of Britain, had brought the South British tribes into the orbit of Latin Civilization. They were of the same race and political group as the northern Gauls, and the Gauls were now Roman subjects, many of them Roman citizens.

A peaceful penetration of the island resulted from the work of Caesar, and prepared the way for the conquest under Claudius. The hundred most important years in the history of the world were not wholly a blank even in Britain. While Julius was being murdered and avenged, while the loves of Anthony and Cleopatra were raising the question of the relations of East and West inside the Roman world, while Augustus was cannily constructing the Empire, far in the north Roman traders and colonists, working from the base of the Latinized province of Gaul, were establishing settlements in the interior of Britain and gaining influence at the courts of its tribal Kings.

Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, unlike his Lear, was no mith. From 5 to 40 A.D.21 he reigned over the Catuvellauni, and so far increased their hegemony in the south of the island as to style himself22 on his silver coinage ‘Rex Brittonum’. The use of the Roman language in his title is all of a piece with23 the good relations he cultivated with the Emperors Augustus and Tiberius. Just as Edward the Confessor prepared the way for the Norman Conquest by introducing Norman knights and clergy into England and making French fashionable at Court, so

6

Cymbeline encouraged Roman traders and craftsmen to colonize the towns of Britain, and familiarized the leading tribesmen24 with the Latin language and civilization. Cymbeline moved his capital from Verulanium near St. Albans to Camulodunum (Colchester) in the territory of the subjugated Trinovantes, whence his mint poured out gold coinage of the Roman type in great profusion.

To his reign, perhaps, belongs the origin of London as a city. Finds have been made in the river bed which suggest that the first edition of London Bridge may have been erected in timber before the Roman Conquest but during the age of Roman influence. It was perhaps during this traditional period that London began to exist at the bridge-head on the northern shore. There was certainly a place of some kind known as London at the time of the invasion under Claudius.

In any case the city which was to play so great a part25 first in English and then in world history26, attained its original importance under the Roman rule. The name of London is Celtic, but it was not a great centre of Iberian or of Celtic civilization: in Caesar’s time and long afterwards, Middlessex was a forest, and much of future London a marsh. But a bluff of hard ground afforded a good bridge-head where roads from the Kentish ports could cross the river and spread out again thence on their journeys northward and westward over the island. It was also the best landing-place for continental commerce coming up the estuary of the Thames. The bridge and port coincided in situation and their geographic coincidence made the greatness of London.

The Romans, after they had conquered the island, made the fortune of27 London Bridge by concentrating upon it one-half of their great roads, from both north and south. And they made the fortune of London port by creating an extensive commerce with the Continent, which found in the long-neglected Thames the best means of entry. London was the point at which goods from Europe could be unshipped well inside the land, and sent to its most distant parts by roads planned not for the local needs of tribes but

for the imperial needs of the province. The principal exports of Roman Britain, with which she purchased the luxuries of the world, were tin, skins, slaves, pearls and sometimes grain.

London became larger and richer under the Roman than she ever was again28 after their departure, until near the Norman Conquest. The Roman walls enclosed an area corresponding very closely to the walls of the City in mediaeval times, which were in fact only the Roman walls restored. In both periods London was a commercial, not a governmental centre. Officially she ranked lower in the Roman hierarchy than much smaller and less important towns.

Until some effective system of military control had been established over the Welsh mountains and the northern moors, war-like tribes would be continually descending from those reservoirs of savagery29 to plunder the demilitarized inhabitants of city and villa in the plains below.

The Roman armies who for so many generations addressed themselves to this problem, were very different from the warrior swarms of Celt, Saxon and Dane, very different too from the feudal host of Norman times. A Roman army was a highly drilled, long-service force30, held together under strict discipline all the year round and from year to year, accustomed, when not fighting, to fatigue duty in building roads, bridges and forts. Unlike the other invaders of Britain, the Romans did not achieve their conquest by indiscriminate slaughter and destruction, nor by ushering in a host of farmer immigrants, nor by the erection of private castles. Their method of conquest was to make military roads, planned on system for the whole island, and to plant along them forts garrisoned by the regular troops. It was thus that the legions were able, after a first check, to do what the Saxons failed to do, and the castle-building Norman Barons only did after long centuries, namely, to subjugate and hold down the Welsh mountaineers. They could not Romanize the mountains as they Romanized the eastern and southern plains,

7

nor plant cities at the foot of Snowdon and Plynlymmon. But by means of roads and forts they had made an effective military occupation of Wales within five-and thirty years of their landing.

Devon and Cornwall they neglected, as an area too small and isolated to be dangerous. Roman remains are scarce beyond Exeter. But Somerset played an important part in the new Britain, Within six years of the Claudian invasion, the new Government was working the Mendip lead-mines. And the waters of Aquae Solis soon made Bath the centre of fashion, luxury and leisure for Romano-British society, desperately resolved to reproduce under leaden skies the gay, lounging life of Imperial Rome.

But the real difficulty of the frontier problem, never wholly solved, lay in the North. Between Tyne and Humber lay the moorlands of heather and white grass that we know, varied in those days by vast forest of brushwood, birch and dwarf oak destined to disappear before the nibbling of sheep when the wool trade developed in a later England. In those desolate regions the savage Brigantes refused to listen to the voice of the Roman charmer, or to lay aside their native habits and warlike aspirations. Beyond them, in modern

Scotland, lay the Caledonians, of Pictish and other race, partly Celtic; they were no more submissive than the Brigantes, and were yet more formidable from the remoteness and the physical character of their territory.

It was not till a century and a half had passed after the Claudian conquest that the Emperor Severus marked the final limit of the northern frontier by renovating (210 A.D.) the wall that Hadrian had erected (123 A.D.) from Solway to the mouth of the Tyne. Several times the Romans had tried to conquer Scotland; once under Tacitus’ father-in-law Agricola, the great Governor of Britain, with his victory at the ‘Mons Graupius’ somewhere on the edge of the Highlands (84 A.D.); one in the reign of Antoninus Pius (140 A.D,); and once again under Severus himself. But the Romans failed in Scotland as repeatedly and hopelessly as the English Plantagenet Kings. Their failure was due not only to the frontal resistance of the Picts in their water-logged straths and inaccessible mountains and forests, but to the frequent rebellions of the Brigantes in the rear. Until they abandoned Caledonia, the Romans’line of communication was too long, being exposed to the likelihood of attack all the way from the Humber northwards.

Some well trenched camps and the ruins of Antoninus1 turf wall from Forth to Clyde were all that the legions left behind them in Scotland – except indeed a greater sense of cohesion among the Pictish tribes, inspired by the common purpose of resisting and ruining the Roman Empire with all its walls and works. No attempt was made to add Ireland to the territory of the Caesars.

G. M. TREVELYAN Illustrated History of England

London, 1964 Vocabulary Practice 1. had glutted their first rage of plunder = şi-au satisfăcut prima lor sete de jaf 2. it was worth his while = merită osteneala 3. with more important work on hand = având mai multe probleme de rezolvat 4. on the spot = de îndată, imediat, pe loc 5. neither... nor = nici... nici 6. he had need of = acea nevoie de 7. might answer all the requirements = putea satisface toate cerinţele 8. first-hand knowledge = informaţii directe

8

9. would-be governors = presupuşii guvernatori 10. he took too small a force = a luat o forţă (armată) prea mică (prea redusă) 11. on a larger scale = pe o scară mai largă 12. put up a stout fight aginst = au organizat o rezisenţă fermă împotriva 13. scythed chariots = car de război, “esedum” 14. the Tenth = centurie (detaşament de 100 de oameni) 15. had seen its day = s-a bucurat de succes 16. as a method of warfare = ca metodă de luptă 17. they have taught themselves = au învăţat, s-au obişnuit 18. gold was secured = aurul se găsea / se obţinea 19. to fetch fancy prices = a obţine preţuri mari 20. if he had any = dacă (într-adevăr) avea vreunul 21. A.D. (Anno Domini) = în era noastră (e.n.) 22. as to style himself = încât să se intituleze 23. is all of a piece with = dovedeşte, este în spiritul 24. leading tribesmen = aristocraţie tribală 25. was to play so great a part = urma să joace un rol atât de important 26. world history = istorie universală 27. made the fortune of = au mărit importanţă / faimă, au îmbogăţit 28. than she ever was again = decât a fost vreodată 29. reservoirs of savagery = ascunzişuri / cuiburi de sălbăticiune 30. long-service force = armată regulată română Word study glut 1. cram, fill, gorge, overfeed, satiate, stuff 2. choke, clog, deluge, flood, inundate, overload, oversupply, saturate while 1. a period or interval of time: once in a long while 2. trouble or time (esp. in the phrase worth one’s while): it’s hardly worth your while to

begin work today 3. the while, at that time: he was working the while spot 1. blemish, blot, blotch, daub, discoloration, flaw, mark, pimple, plook (Scot.), pustule,

smudge, speck, stain, taint 2. locality, location, place, point, position, scene, site, situation 3. Inf. bit, little, morsel, splash 4. Inf. difficulty, mess, plight, predicament, quandary, trouble requirement demand, desideratum, essential, lack, must, necessity, need, precondition, prerequisite, qualification, requisite, sine qua non, specification, stipulation, want knowledge 1. education, enlightenment, erudition, instruction, intelligence, learning, scholarship,

schooling, science, tuition, wisdom

9

2. ability, apprehension, cognition, comprehension, consciousness, discernment, grasp, judgment, recognition, understanding

3. acquaintance, cognizance, familiarity, information, intimacy, notice force 1. dynamism, energy, impact, impulse, life, might, momentum, muscle, potency, power,

pressure, stimulus, strength, stress, vigour 2. arm-twisting (Inf.), coercion, compulsion, constraint, duress, enforcement, pressure,

violence bite, cogency, effect, effectiveness, efficacy, influence, persuasiveness, power, punch (Inf.), strength, validity, weight

3. drive, emphasis, fierceness, intensity, persistence, vehemence, vigour 4. army, battalion, body, corps, detachment, division, host, legion, patrol, regiment,

squad, squadron, troop, unit scale 1. calibration, degrees, gamut, gradation, graduated system, graduation, hierarchy, ladder,

pecking order (Inf.), progression, ranking, register, seniority system, sequence, series, spectrum, spread, steps

2. proportion, ratio 3. degree, extent, range, reach, scope, way warfare armed conflict, armed struggle, arms, battle, blows, campaigning, clash of arms, combat, conflict, contest, discord, fighting, hostilities, passage of arms, strategy, strife, struggle, war fetch 1. bring, carry, conduct, convey, deliver, escort, get, go for, lead, obtain, retrieve,

transport 2. draw forth, elicit, give rise to, produce 3. bring in, earn, go for, make, realize, sell for, yield

10

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 2 2. THE LIMITS OF LATINIZATION

The area of true Roman occupation was therefore confined almost exactly to modern England and Wales. Except, of course, that the wall of Hadrian and Severus ran along the northern bank of the Tyne, instead of along the crests of Cheviot Hills. Impressed by the wild moors stretching away from the northern foot of the wall, visitors speak of it as running through a wilderness. In a sense this is true, but the course of the wall is accompanied on the south by the Tyne valley, a natural line of civilization where the modern town and railway are found. The Cheviot tops, and indeed almost any other line across North England, would have been more difficult for purposes of supply. The Romans, while occupying the wall as their line, normally held a few forts north of it, but south of Cheviot: ‘indeed’ says Haverfield, ‘we may call Cheviot then (as now) the dividing line between north and south’. But this area was itself divided into two sharply contrasted regions, the Latinized South and East, the barbarian North and West.

North of Humber and Trent, west of Severn and Exe, Celto-Iberian tribalism survived in its more primitive form. This moorland of Britain, where nearly all the garrison spent nearly all its time, was indeed the chief area of military occupation, but it was nothing more. It was patrolled by some 40,000 men, nearly a tenth of the total forces of the Empire. Their three bases were the great fortresses of York, Chester and Caerleon, each the headquarters of a legion. In Wales, the Pennines, Cumberland and Northumbria, the mail-clad infantry marched and countermarched along the roads they had made from mountain camp to mountain camp, through a sparse and savage population, either hostile or indifferent to their passage. Devon and Cornwall were an isolated pocket of Celtic tribalism. It was in the fruitful plains of the South-East that the Latinized Britons were concentrated, in a peaceful and civilian land, where the sight of a cohort on the march was a rarity, but where Roman cities and villas were plentiful and Roman civilization powerful in its attraction.

Owing to this cultural distinction between the two geographic sections of the island, it happened that the districts destined to be overrun by the Saxon destroyer were the districts most given over to the Latin influences of city and villa life. On the other hand, Wales and Cornwall, Strathclyde and Lancashire, where alone independent Celtic life was destined to survive the coming of the Saxons, were precisely those districts wherein Celtic life had been least altered by the Roman occupation. This accident goes far to explain1 why Roman influence was permanent in no part of the island.

But a second and more general reason can be given for Rome’s failure to latinize Britain as she latinized Gaul. Britain was too far from the Mediterranean. Southern France is itself a Mediterranean land. But the civilization of the Italian city, the life of the forum and piazza, shivers when transplanted too far north. The ancient world was a Mediterranean civilization. It was the mediaeval world that first became truly European, by losing the Levant and North Africa and by winning Germany for Christendom. In the ancient world, Britain was a distant and isolated outpost; in the Middle

Ages, it was much nearer to the heart of the Christian and feudal civilization. Therefore the Norman work in the island had more permanence than the Roman. Not enough Italian or Mediterranean folk came to Celtic Britain a to change the character of its civilization except superficially. But the superficial success of the Romans in the richest agricultural districts of South and East was very remarkable, all the more remarkable since it proved so transient. By no means all the ‘Roman’ merchants, garrison and civil service came from Mediterranean

11

lands. Especially after the first generation, many of the soldiers were of Celtic, Teutonic or other northern origin: in peace time perhaps 1000 to 1500 were paid off every year, but we do not know how many of them settled in the island after they had served their time2. Nor is there evidence of any extensive immigration of civilians, though enough traders must have come to teach the language and civilization of the Empire to large sections of the natives. Persons of foreign origin were chiefly gathered in the towns.

The Mediterranean civilization, of which Rome had become the armed missionary, was based on city life. In that respect it differed from the Celtic civilization which it conquered and from the Saxon and feudal civilization that was destined to succeed it. The Roman Empire had grown out of a city state3; it had annexed a number of other city states in the Mediterranean, and had planted new cities among the tribes of Gaul. The true life of the Empire lay in the hundred of walled towns, linked up by military roads, that held together its otherwise unwieldy bulk. From each of these cities it strove to govern and transform the surrounding countryside. And so in south Britain the first thing the Romans did was to build cities.

Besides London and the greater municipalities there were many lesser towns like Silchester, which the Romans planned out in their rectangular fashion, and in most cases protected with stone walls. In these towns even the common workmen talked Latin and were educated enough to read and write it, as we know from the words they scribbled for their amusement on tile and potsherd as they worked, which modern archaeologists have dug up and interpreted. It was a high civilization, much more elaborate than anything seen again for many centuries in England. But it was not a native product,4 sprung from the soil5; it was the life of the great cosmopolitan Empire oversea, of which the more progressive among the island tribes were content for a while to become a part.

Beyond the city walls Roman civilization petered away by degrees, through regions of Romano-British ‘villadom’, into regions of mere Celtic tribalism. The countryside was sprinkled with smart Roman villas, built of stone in the Italian style, adorned with mosaics, frescoes and baths. Attached to each villa was an estate, worked by slaves, or by coloni who were bound to the soil and to its proprietor under rules as harsh as those which bound the mediaeval villein. If there was not liberty there was peace. So real was the Pax Romana in the demilitarized districts of the South-East that these country-houses were not fortified or even protected by a moat, like the mediaeval castle and manor house. The only people trained to fight were the soldiers of the regular army: this was one reason why Romanized Britain fell so easy a prey to the invader when men could no longer count on the protection of the legions.

In some of our southern counties, villas are constantly being unearthed; in others they are seldom found. Celtic ‘trevs’ of the Roman period are occasionally dug up; the ground-plan of the hamlet and the form of the cottage are native, but the inhabitants used pottery and ustensils of the Roman type. Celtic arts and crafts had been largely displaced by the prestige of the ‘Sa-mian’ and other Italian wares, just as European models drive out the native arts of Asia and Africa to-day, not always to the true enrichment of the world. But there is no evidence what language or languages the rural Celts talked, nor how far if at all their land system and habits of life and agriculture had been altered by contact with Rome. To resolve such questions we have little to go upon, and high authorities like Haverfield and Vinogradoff have held more or less divergent views.

The area of agriculture and the area of land reclaimed from forest and fen were both extended in Roman times, at least in some districts, as for instance in Cambridgeshire. But even there the work was only begun; and the Midlands from Bucks to Warwickshire were still left in the main to the forest. The valleys of Thames and Trent, still water-logged, contained no connected line of important towns and villages as in later days. The Roman did something for deforesting and draining, but the yeoman’s work in these matters was left for the stalwart industry of Saxon and Danish townships, extended over a thousand years. Nevertheless in

12

those districts which were already reclaimed for the plough, Roman Britain raised enough grain to export considerably to the continent.

........................................................................................ In accordance with its custom, the privileged municipalities in the island not only enjoyed

self-government but had jurisdiction each over a rural area as large as a modern county. There were five such governing cities: Verulanium, Colchester, Lincoln, Gloucester and York; mercantile London, though larger than any of these, had less official status.

The rest of civilized Britain was divided up into cantons, answering to Celtic tribal areas and bearing the tribal names. The cantonal administration was as far as possible centred on some Roman town not of municipal rank. It was characteristic of the Romans that instead of trying to stamp out native tribalism they used it as a means of government, while undermining its spirit by contact with their own more attractive civilization. Every inducement was offered to the Celtic chief to become Roman in dress, language and heart; on these conditions he could remain a Celtic chief in relation to his tribesmen, exercising his authority over them as a togaed Roman official. This policy, which might appear to an iron bureaucrat to be a dangerous concession to tribalism, became in fact the means of Romanizing the Celt with his own good will. The same cantonal system was established in Gaul; but whereas the cantonal names and areas survived the Frankish conquest of Gaul, they disappeared in the more destructive Saxon invasion of Britain.

GEORGE MACAULAY TREVELYAN A Shortened History of England

London, 1963 Vocabulary Practice 1. this accident goes far to explain = acest fapt explică pe deplin 2. they had served their time = după ce şi-au îndeplinit stagiul militar 3. The Roman Empire had gone out of a city state = Imperiul roman a depăşit stadiul unui

oraş stat 4. native product = produs propriu 5. sprung from the soil = născut din solul ţării Word study accident 1. blow, calamity, casualty, chance, collision, crash, disaster, misadventure, mischance,

misfortune, mishap, pile-up 2. chance, fate, fluke, fortuity, fortune, hazard, luck to serve 1. aid, assist, attend to, be in the service of, be of assistance, be of use, help, minister to,

oblige, succour, wait on, work for 2. act, attend, complete, discharge, do, fulfil, go through, observe, officiate, pass, perform 3. answer, answer the purpose, be acceptable, be adequate, be good enough, content, do,

do duty as, do the work of, fill the bill (Inf.), function as, satisfy, suffice, suit 4. arrange, deal, deliver, dish up, distribute, handle, present, provide, set out, supply state body politic, commonwealth, country, federation, government, kingdom, land, nation, republic, territory

13

native 1. built-in, congenital, endemic, hereditary, inborn, inbred, indigenous, ingrained,

inherent, inherited, innate, instinctive, intrinsic, inveterate, natal, natural 2. genuine, original, real 3. domestic, home, home-grown, home-made, indigenous, local, mother, vernacular 4. aboriginal, autochthonous soil 1. clay, dirt, dust, earth, ground, loam 2. country, land, region, terra firma

14

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 3 3. THE END OF SAXON ENGLAND

Late in the Tenth Century1 the Danish invasions were renewed under Sweyn, who had

managed to unite Denmark and Norway under his rule. The intervening period2 had been largely filled with inroads on Northern France, but with the establishment of a strong Scandinavian principality in Normandy the centre of attack shifted. The wealth and degeneration of England, of which the Danes must have been well aware, made it one more the most profitable objective. These new attacks were organized on a curiously commercial plan, a preliminary harrying being followed by a demand for the payment of money as a condition of withdrawal. Every couple of years3 the operation was repeated.

These payments of Danegeld, as it was called, were made seven times between 991 and 1014 and totalled 158,000 pounds of silver, equal to at least Ł 10,000,000 in modern money, a gigantic sum for this period. When Canute became king in 1018 arid paid off his army, a final geld of 82,500 pounds was extorted. From this Danegeld grew the first regular taxation. Under Canute and the Norman kings it was levied regularly, and it became the basis of a property tax that was an important part of the Budget of all kings until the Stuart period. Its social results were equally far reaching,4 since it became a crushing burden upon the cultivator, driving him ever more rapidly into servitude. It increased correspondingly the power of the local magnates who were made responsible for its collection and used this office as a further lever 5 to establish their power as lords of the land and its tillers. The feudal maxims “No man without a lord” and “No land without a lord” can be fully applied to England from this time.

Another feature of these invasions was the leadership of the citizens of London in organizing resistance. When the central government under Ethel-red the Redeless collapsed miserably, London stood firm. Already greater beyond comparison than any other English town, it now begins to appear in history almost as an independent political force. So great was its importance that we read that in 1016 the fyrd of Mercia refused to move against the Danes “unless they had the support of the burgesses of London”, Year after year the Danes were driven back from its walls, and it only surrendered when resistance elsewhere was virtually at an end. Its wealth can be judged from the fact that when the great geld of 1018 was levied, London had to pay 10,500 pounds of silver, more than one eighth of the total for the whole country.

When in 1018 Canute, son of Sweyn, became King of England, as wellas of Norway and Denmark it appeared for the moment as if the future of England was to be linked with the Scandinavian lands rather than with France, But the social structure of the Northern peoples was still largely tribal and so inadequate for the basis of a permanent empire. The unity temporarily achieved depended too much on the personality of an. individual and ended with his death. It was not till Northern, energy had been crossed with French feudal institutions that it was capable of advancing towards a permanent State power.

One further development under Canute was the formation of a small standing army of

highly trained, paid, professional soldiers, the housecarls, A recurrent tendency within feudalism is for the feudal or semi-feudal soldier class (knights or thanes) to evolve into landowners and to become less willing to perform military duties. The formation of the housecarls under Canute is thus a close parallel to the replacement of the feudal knight by the professional mercenary during the Hundred Years’ War. The one other thing that must be noted in this region is the rise of the house of Godwin from obscurity to virtual control of all England outside the Danelaw,

15

When Canute died, his sons were incapable of holding his dominions together and the Godwins were able to restore the old English line6 without opposition. The new king, Edward the Confessor, was a pious half-wit who had spent his youth as an exile in Normandy. When he returned he brought a train of Norman monks and nobles to whom he gave the best and richest bishoprics and lands. The history of his reign is one of constant struggle between the Norman influence at court and the power of the Godwins. The permeation of England by the Normans was one of the main reasons for the ease with which their conquest was carried through.7

Eventually the Godwins triumphed and established complete control over the king, a control similar to that exercised by the contemporary Capetians over the French descendants of Charlemagne. All England was now divided into six great earldoms, and of these three were held by the Godwins. When Edward died in January 1066, the Witan, or council of wise men, a body with some of the characteristics of the Teutonic folk moot8 and more of the feudal King’s Council, proclaimed Harold, eldest son of Godwin, king. William, Duke of Normandy, also claimed the throne and began to assemble an army to enforce his claim.

The conquest of England by the Normans can be regarded both as the last of the hostings of the Northmen and the first of the Crusades. Though William was a feudal prince, his army was not a feudal army but one gathered from all quarters9 by the promise of10 land and plunder. He safeguarded himself with an elaborate chain of alliances, including one with the Pope that formed the basis for many later claims and disputes. His army was not large – perhaps about 12,000 – but was trained in methods of warfare unknown in England. The English had learned from the Danes to use horses to move swiftly from place to place, but continued to fight on foot11 in a dense mass behind the traditional shield wall. Their principal weapon was the axe. The Normans employed a skilful combination of heavy armoured cavalry and crossbowmen which enabled them to break up the ranks12 of their opponents from a distance before pushing home a decisive charge. Once the shield wall was broken the effectiveness of the cavalry in pursuit made recovery out of question,13 This was the military reason for William’s victory, just as the political reason was his firm control over his vassals as compared with the defiant attitude adopted by the Earls of Mercia and Northumbria towards Harold.

A. L. MORTON from A People’s History of England

London, 1956 Vocabulary Practice 1. late in the Tenth Century = spre sfârşitul secolului al X-lea 2. the intervening period = perioada care s-a scurs 3. every couple of years = din doi în doi ani, la câţiva ani 4. far reaching = cu urmări serioase / profunde 5. a further lever = un alt mijloc 6. the old English line = vechea linie de succesiune engleză 7. their conquest was carried through = cucerirea lor a fost înfăptuită 8. Teutonic folk moot = vechea adunare germanică a oamenilor liberi 9. from all quarters – din toate păturile (stratele sau sferele) 10. by the promise of = cu promisiunea 11. on foot = pe jos, pedestru 12. to break up the ranks = a rupe rândurile 13. out of the question = cu neputinţă Word study

16

to intervene 1. arbitrate, intercede, interfere, interpose oneself, intrude, involve oneself, mediate, step

in (Inf.), take a hand (Inf.) 2. befall, come to pass, ensue, happen, occur, succeed, supervene, take place lever 1. bar, crowbar, handle, handspike, jemmy 2. force, jemmy, move, prise, pry (U.S.), purchase, raise line 1. row, column, file, queue, rank, string, tier, chain, train, series 2. road, byway, alley, course, boulevard, street, avenue, carriageway, autoroute, passage,

path, route, way, roadway 3. model, brand, cut, make, pattern 4. clan, ancestors, breed, descendants, dynasty, family, house, kindred, lineage, people,

race, stock, strain, tribe conquest 1. defeat, discomfiture, mastery, overthrow, rout, triumph, vanquishment, victory 2. acquisition, annexation, appropriation, coup, invasion, occupation, subjection,

subjugation, takeover 3. captivation, enchantment, enthralment, enticement, seduction 4. acquisition, adherent, admirer, catch, fan, feather in one’s cap, follower, prize,

supporter, worshipper folk clan, ethnic group, family, kin, kindred, people, race, tribe

17

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 4 4. THE HUNDRED YEARS’ WAR

No clear economic motives such as led to the outbreak of the Hundred Years’ War can be discerned in its renewal by Henry V in 1415. Here, as often during the Fifteenth Century, we are left with a sense of parody, of a dying class following a policy blindly for no better reason than that it had been tried before. It is almost as if an inner compulsion was driving Crown and nobility into the course of action inevitably fatal to themselves but unavoidable because no course more immediately hopeful could be found. It was a situation characteristic of an age on the edge of a great social transformation and can be paralleled by the equally blind and suicidal impulse which we have seen driving the reactionary forces today towards war and Fascism.

Such an impulse can usually be defended with plausible political reasoning, and there were an abundance of satisfactory political reasons for the renewal of the attempt to conquer France in 1415. At homel Henry’s position was still insecure and a campaign in France was the most obvious way both of conciliating and finding employment for the great nobles. For them such a war meant the opportunity of unlimited plunder and in their eyes Richard’s peace policy, had been one of his main offences. A claim to the French throne, however baseless, meant an immediate strengthening of Henry’s position as King of England, diverting attention from the flaws in his own title.

At the same time there was considerable social unrest as was indicated by the Lollard rising led by Sir John Oldcastle in 1414.

In France the ally without whom no attempted conquest could possibly be successful was provided by the civil war that had broken out between the Dukes of Burgundy and Orleans. The Orleanist faction controlled the imbecile king Charles VI. In the summer of 1415, Henry, having concluded an alliance with the Burgundians, landed with an army in Normandy.

Just as the war was an unoriginal copy of an old policy so the strategy pursued in the first campaign followed slavishly the pattern2 set by Edward III in his Crecy campaign. After a siege in which disease carried off half the invaders, Harfleur at the mouth of the Seine was captured. Henry then plunged recklessly into the interior, only to be cornered at Azincourt by an army that outnumbered his by about six to one. Here in their turn the French repeated all the old errors and suffered a defeat3 even more crushing than of Crecy. Henry was too weak to follow up the victory4 and returned to England.

Two years later he began a more systematic invasion which had as its object the piecemeal reduction of Normandy. This was done by a methodical seizure of one district after another, each gain being consolidated and the inhabitants of the new territory conciliated so that it formed a base for a further advance.

This realistic strategy, together with sweeping successes5 by his Bur-gundian allies, enabled Henry to secure, at the Treaty of Troyes in 1420, a recognition of his claim to the French throne to which he was to succeed6 on the death7 of Charles VI. At the time of Henry’s death in 1422 half France was under his direct control. His brother the Duke of Bedford continued the war along the same lines and by 1428 the French were desperately defending their last important stronghold at Orleans.

It was this moment that the curious figure of Joan of Arc appears, throwing a light on one of the obscurest aspects of medieval history. The bare outlines of her career are remarkable enough. A peasant girl from Lorraine, she persuaded the French authorities to give her a position of authority hi the army that was attempting to relieve Orleans, an army that had ceased to believe even in the possibility of victory. Her arrival disheartened the English and

18

encouraged the French to such an extent 8 that the siege was quickly raised.9 Further successes were followed by the crowning of the Dauphin, son of Charles VI, as King of France at Rheims in 1429. Less than a year later, after some futile campaigns that there is every reason to believe were deliberately sabotaged by the French military authorities, Joan was captured and burned as a witch by the English in the Rouen marketplace in 1431.

Her acceptance by the French authorities appears to have been the result of a court intrigue, but this does not explain the extraordinary effect she has on the common soldiers of both French and English armies. She acted as a. trigger force,10 releasing an energy hitherto latent and giving the war against the English, previously only an affair of the nobility, a popular, national character. Against this national resistance the professional armies of the English were as powerless as they had been in the age of du Guesclin.

........................................................................................ The continued success of the French after the death of Joan was due to other factors

besides the enthusiasm that she released. A quarrel between the English and the Burgundians united the two warring factions against the invaders and is probably the main cause of their defeat. The French armies also made an important tactical innovation – the use of artillery in battle as well as for siege operations. The Battle of Chattilon in 1453 exposed the limitations of the traditional English methods when used in attack on a prepared position defended by even the crude cannon of the period.

But long before the Battle of Chatillon the war had been virtually lost. The difficulties of the army in France had been increased by dissensions at home after the death of the one really capable commander and politician, the Duke of Bedford, in 1435.

The corruption and mismanagement of the noble who ruled in the name of Henry VI – an infant when he came to the throne and later half-witted – led to the army being starved of supplies and reinforcements. After the Battle of Chatillon the war was finally abandoned and only Calais remained in English hands.

THE WARS OF THE ROSES Barely two years after the close of the French war the long continued anarchy and violence

of the nobles burst out into open civil war. The Wars of the Roses, which occupy thirty years from 1455 to 1485, brought the period to a blo dy close and completed the self-destruction of the nobles as a ruling class. The defeat in France had brought back the mos warlike nobles, more dissatisfied than ever and eager to recoup their losses, with bands of soldiers in their pay11 unfit for any peaceful employment. Under such circumstances a general outbreak of civil war was inevitable.

In form, however, this war was a dynastic struggle between descendants of Edward III who had rival claims to the throne. To this extent12 it was the outcome of a policy that had been initiated by Edward III who had married his children to the heirs of the most powerful nobles in the hope of strengthening his family. In this way immense lands and wealth were con-centrated in the hands of a small group of men all connected with the royal house and all politically ambitious. In the long run, instead of strengthening the Crown it had had the effect of concentrating the opposition and making it doubly dangerous.

The early part of the reign of Henry VI was filled with a constant struggle between these groups, carried out by methods of intrigue, assassination and judicial terror.

By 1445 the King was under the control of a group headed by the Earl of Suffolk, while the opposition was led by Richard Mortimer, Duke of York, and the nearest claimant to the throne. During this long period the corruption of the Ministers of the Crown reached its highest point. In 1433 the revenue from the royal estates had dwindled to about Ł 9,000 a year, a tiny fraction of what found its way into the pockets of the ruling clique. The cost of government therefore fell more than ever upon the taxpayers.

19

Even before the end of the Hundred Years’ War the general discontent aroused by this misgovernment had found expression in the Kentish revolt led by Jack Cade. This revolt had a double character. In part it was a kite flown by the Duke of York to test the popular feeling and the strength of the Government. From this point of view it can be regarded as the first phase of the Wars of the Roses. But it was also a genuinely popular rising of the middle classes, merchants, and country gentry and yeomen farmers, against the misgovernment of the great nobles.

It was a very different movement from that of 1381. Serfdom was now almost extinct, and in Kent had long been extinct. The demands of the rebels, set out in the “Bill of Complaints and Requests of the Commons of Kent”,13 are wholly political in character, while the composition of Cade’s army, which included many squires and well-to-do people as well as peasants and labourers, was far wider and more varied than that of the earlier rising.

The main grievances listed were the inclusion of “persons of lower nature”14 in the King’s Council, the mismanagement of the French war, a specially sore point15 in Kent, which, lying on the direct lines of communication, usually prospered in wartime, and the rigging of elections. The rebels demanded that the Duke of York and his party should be brought into the Council and the followers of Suffolk should be dismissed and punished.

Early in 1450 a strongly Yorkist Parliament had met and impeached Suffolk who was banished. On his way to Calais he was seized by sailors on board ship, beheaded and his body thrown on Dover beach. This murder was the signal for revolt and on June 1st an army of 50,000 men from all parts of Kent marched on Blackheath to place their demands16 before the Council.

They were refused a hearing and a royal army moved out to Greenwich against them. They retired in good order to the wooded country around

Sevenoaks. A panic then seized the Government. Its army melted away and Cade’s followers entered London, where they had many supporters, on July 2nd. Lord Saye, on of the most unpopular ministers, and Crowmer, sheriff of Kent, were captured and executed. The rebels kept good order17 and there was little looting, but this restraint soond created a real problem. To feed so large an army demanded considerable funds and Cade proposed to levy the rich London merchants for this purpose. They had hitherto supported the rebels, sharing the general hatred of the Government, but now they began to wonder what this popular army would do next.

On July 5th they suddenly seized London Bridge, shutting off Cade and his men, quartered in Southwark, from the City. All next day a battle was fought for the Bridge, but the rebels were at last driven back. On the 6th, while they were disheartened by this reverse, envoys from the Government came offering a free pardon to all and promising to consider their demands. They dispersed, only Cade and a few of his followers remaining in arms.18 Cade was hunted down and killed and in an judicial progress19 through Kent, known as the ‘harvest of heads’, many of the most active rebels were executed.

The rising had exposed the weakness of the Government, and in 1455 the Wars of the Roses opened with a victory for the Duke of York over the royal party at St. Albans. The war that followed was not feudal in character, that is, it was not waged by barons who wanted to enlarge their domains and make themselves independent of the central authority, but the rival groups of nobles fighting to gain control of the State machine. This is the main reason for its ferocity. In feudal war one of the main objects was to capture opponents and hold them to ransom20 and only those who were too poor to pay were slaughtered. The Wars of the Roses were wars of extermination, every victory being followed by a crop of murders and by the confiscation of the lands of the defeated to the Crown. Hence they were extremely destructive to the participants though they hardly affected the country as a whole. The numbers engaged were usually so small that the economic life of the time was little disturbed and, the mass of the people seem to have been generally indifferent as to the result.

20

The war was in form a battle between rival gangs of nobles, but underlying the struggle was another real though hardly apparent issue. Supporting the Lancastrians were the wild nobles of the Scottish and Welsh borders, the most backward and feudal elements surviving in the country. The Yorkists drew most of their support21 from the progressive South, from East Anglia and from London, even if this support was not usually very active. The ultimate victory of the Yorkists was therefore a victory of the most economically advanced area and prepared the ground for the Tudor monarchy of the next century with its bourgeois backing.

Towton, the one great battle of the war, standing out among a welter of skirmishes,22 underlines this fact. The Lancastrians had advanced south with a great army of Northerners, plundering as they went. They reached St. Albans but London closed its gates and prepared for a siege. Edward, the son of Richard Duke of York who had been killed in 1460, marched swiftly from Gloucester and entered the city. The Lancastrians retired and were caught in a violent snowstorm at Towton on March 29th, 1461. Their defeat was as much a victory of the South over the Northern specialists in fighting of Kent, were captured and executed. The rebels kept good order17 and there was little looting, but this restraint soond created a real problem. To feed so large an army demanded considerable funds and Cade proposed to levy the rich London merchants for this purpose. They had hitherto supported the rebels, sharing the general hatred of the Government, but now they began to wonder what this popular army would do next.

On July 5th they suddenly seized London Bridge, shutting off Cade and his men, quartered in Southwark, from the City. All next day a battle was fought for the Bridge, but the rebels were at last driven back. On the 6th, while they were disheartened by this reverse, envoys from the Government came offering a free pardon to all and promising to consider their demands. They dispersed, only Cade and a few of his followers remaining in arms.18 Cade was hunted down and killed and in an judicial progress19 through Kent, known as the ‘harvest of heads’, many of the most active rebels were executed.

The rising had exposed the weakness of the Government, and in 1455 the Wars of the Roses opened with a victory for the Duke of York over the royal party at St. Albans. The war that followed was not feudal in character, that is, it was not waged by barons who wanted to enlarge their domains and make themselves independent of the central authority, but the rival groups of nobles fighting to gain control of the State machine. This is the main reason for its ferocity, In feudal war one of the main objects was to capture opponents and hold them to ransom20 and only those who were too poor to pay were slaughtered. The Wars of the Roses were wars of extermination, every victory being followed by a crop of murders and by the confiscation of the lands of the defeated to the Crown. Hence they were extremely destructive to the participants though they hardly affected the country as a whole. The numbers engaged were usually so small that the economic life of the time was little disturbed and the mass of the people seem to have been generally indifferent as to the result.

The war was in form a battle between rival gangs of nobles, but underlying the struggle was another real though hardly apparent issue. Supporting the Lancastrians were the wild nobles of the Scottish and Welsh borders, the most backward and feudal elements surviving in the country. 1 he Yorkists drew most of their support21 from the progressive South, from East Anglia and from London, even if this support was not usually very active. The ultimate victory of the Yorkists was therefore a victory of the most economically advanced area and prepared the ground for the Tudor monarchy of the next century with its bourgeois backing.

Towton, the one great battle of the war, standing out among a welter of skirmishes,22 underlines this fact. The Lancastrians had advanced south with a great army of Northerners, plundering as they went. They reached St, Albans but London closed its gates and prepared for a siege. Edward, the son of Richard Duke of York who had been killed in 1460, marched swiftly from Gloucester and entered the city. The Lancastrians retired and were caught in a violent snowstorm at Towton on March 29th, 1461. Their defeat was as much a victory of the

21

South over the Northern specialists in fighting as of Yorkists over Lancastrians and brought the first phase of the war to a conclusion.23

Edward IV, who came to the throne immediately after the battle, anticipated many of the characteristics of the Tudor absolutism. He maintained friendly and intimate relations with the merchants of London, Bristol and other great trading cities. From the beginning the Yorkists had found the support of the Hanse towns of immense value, securing them the command of the sea and enabling them to land at any point of the coast. At the same time, since his claim to the throne was made good in the face of the Parliamentary title of the House of Lancaster, Edward ignored Parliament almost entirely and like Henry VII, preferred to raise money24 by direct negotiations with his merchant supporters. Not only did Edward establish intimate rela-tions with the merchants, but he embarked upon25 trade himself on a grand scale.26 The forfeiture of the estates of his enemies made him richer than any English king before him, and he built whole fleets in which wool, tin and cloth were shipped abroad as far as the Mediterranean. He anticipated the Tudors, also, in devising new and arbitrary methods of taxation.

He also reduced as far as possible the power of the great nobles, creating a new nobility directly dependent upon himself as a counterbalancing force.27 But he was unable to do much to end the anarchy on internal disorder. His attempts to curb the nobility, including those who had been his supporters, led to a dangerous rising headed by the Earl of Warwick. This was supressed, but after Edward’s death in 1483 the older nobles under his brother Richard had little difficulty in ousting the new men whom he had left to govern for his young son. Richard made himself king after having Edward’s sons murdered but in his turn found himself involved in a struggle with the nobles who had helped him to power. This inevitable struggle involved all the kings of the period in a contradiction that remained insoluble till almost all the great families had become extinct.28

When Henry Tudor, who produced a remote claim to the throne, landed at Milford Haven, the treason and desertion that had been a constant feature of the age reasserted itself and Richard found himself almost without supporters. The Battle of Bosworth, fought on August 22nd, 1485, by a mere handful of men on either side, ended the Wars of the Roses and with them a whole historic epoch in England. The new monarchy founded by Henry VII was of a totally new kind, based upon a new relation of class forces.

It is not often possible to fix a date for such events, but in 1485, so far as this country is concerned, the Middle Ages can be said to have ended.

A. L. MORTON from A People’s History of England

London, 1957 Vocabulary Practice 1. at home = pe plan intern 2. to set a pattern = a servi ca model 3. to suffer a defeat = a suferi o înfrângere, a fi învins 4. to follow up a victory = a exploata o victorie 5. sweeping successes = succese mari, zdrobitoare 6. to succeed to a throne = a urma la un tron 7. on the death = la moartea 8. in (to) to such an extent = în asemenea măsură 9. to raise a siege = a ridica un asediu, a depresura 10. trigger force = forţa mobilizatoare 11. in their pay = în solda lor 12. to this extent = în felul acesta, până într-atât

22

13. Bill of Complaint and Request of the Commons of Kent = Proiectul de plângere şi revendicări ale comunelor din Kent

14. persons of lower nature = persoane de obârşie mai joasă 15. a sore point = punct nevralgic 16. to place one’s demands = a-şi prezenta revendicările 17. to keep good order = a menţine ordine 18. remaining in arms = rămânând sub arme 19. a judicial progress = o expediţie de pedeapsă 20. to hold to ransom = a cere răscumpărarea 21. to draw one’ support = a-şi asigura sprijinul 22. a welter of skirmishes = nenumărate mici încăierari 23. to bring smith. to a conclusion = a încheia, a conchide 24. to raise money = a strânge bani 25. to embark upon = a se lansa în 26. on a grand scale = pe scară largă 27. counterbalancing force = contrapondere 28. had become extinct = s-au stins, au pierit Word study pattern 1. arrangement, decoration, decorative design, design, device, figure, motif, ornament 2. arrangement, method, order, orderliness, plan, sequence, system 3. kind, shape, sort, style, type, variety 4. design, diagram, guide, instructions, original, plan, stencil, template 5. archetype, criterion, cynosure, example, exemplar, guide, model, norm, original,

paradigm, paragon, prototype, sample, specimen, standard defeat 1. beating, conquest, debacle, overthrow, repulse, rout, trouncing, vanquishment 2. disappointment, discomfiture, failure, frustration, rebuff, repulse, reverse, setback,

thwarting success 1. ascendancy, eminence, fame, favourable outcome, fortune, happiness, hit (Inf.), luck, prosperity, triumph

2. best seller, big name, celebrity, hit (Inf.), market leader, sensation, smash hit (Inf.), somebody, star, V.I.P., winner

to succeed 1. arrive (Inf.), be successful, come off (Inf.), do all right for oneself (Inf.), do the trick

(Inf.), flourish, gain one’s end, get to the top (Inf.), make good, make it (Inf.), prosper, thrive, triumph, turn out well, work

2. be subsequent, come next, ensue, follow, result, supervene 3. Usually with to : accede, assume the office of, come into, come into possession of,

enter upon, inherit, replace, take over extent 1. bounds, compass, play, range, reach, scope, sphere, sweep 2. amount, amplitude, area, breadth, bulk, degree, duration, expanse, expansion, length,

magnitude, measure, quantity, size, stretch, term, time, volume, width trigger

23

activate, bring about, cause, elicit, generate, give rise to, produce, prompt, provoke, set in motion, set off, spark off, start nature 1. attributes, character, complexion, constitution, essence, features, make-up, quality,

traits 2. category, description, kind, sort, species, style, type, variety 3. cosmos, creation, earth, environment, universe, world 4. disposition, humour, mood, outlook, temper, temperament 5. country, countryside, landscape, natural history, scenery sore 1. angry, burning, chafed, inflamed, irritated, painful, raw, reddened, sensitive, smarting,

tender 2. annoying, distressing, grievous, harrowing, severe, sharp, troublesome 3. acute, critical, desperate, dire, extreme, pressing, urgent 4. afflicted, aggrieved, angry, annoyed, grieved, hurt, irked, irritated, pained, peeved

(Inf.), resentful, stung, upset, vexed demand 1. bidding, charge, inquiry, interrogation, order, question, request, requisition 2. call, claim, necessity, need, requirement, want 3. in demand : fashionable, in vogue, needed, popular, requested, sought after remain abide, be left, cling, continue, delay, dwell, endure, go on, last, linger, persist, prevail, rest, stand, stay, stay behind, stay put (Inf.), survive, tarry, wait progress 1. advance, course, movement, onward course, passage, progression, way 2. advance, advancement, amelioration, betterment, breakthrough, development, gain,

gaining ground, growth, headway, improvement, increase, progression, promotion, step forward

3. in progress: being done, going on, happening, occurring, proceeding, taking place, under way

ransom 1. deliverance, liberation, redemption, release, rescue 2. money, payment, payoff, price support 1. abutment, back, brace, foundation, lining, pillar, post, prop, shore, stanchion, stay,

stiffener, underpinning 2. aid, approval, assistance, backing, blessing, championship, comfort, encouragement,

friendship, furtherance, help, loyalty, moral support, patronage, protection, relief, succour, sustenance

3. keep, livelihood, maintenance, subsistence, sustenance, upkeep 4. backbone, backer, comforter, mainstay, prop, second, stay, supporter, tower of strength welter confusion, hotchpotch, jumble, mess, muddle, tangle, web

24

embark 1. board ship, go aboard, put on board, take on board, take ship 2. With on {or} upon begin, broach, commence, engage, enter, initiate, launch, plunge

into, set about, set out, start, take up, undertake couterbalance balance, compensate, counterpoise, countervail, make up for, offset, set off

25

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 5 5. THE END OF THE MIDDLE AGES

The Fifteenth Century was an age of violent contrasts which are reflected in the diverse and contradictory views expressed about it by historians. To some it has appeared a period of general decline, of ruined towns and political chaos. Others have pointed to the real increase of prosperity of the mass of the people, to the growth of trade and industry and to the development of parliamentary institutions in the period from 1399 to 1450. The key to the proper understanding of the age is that both views are correct but neither complete, that while feudal relations and the feudal mode of production were decaying, bourgeois relations and the bourgeois mode of production were developing rapidly.

The decline of feudalism did not only affect the baronage and agriculture, it affected also the towns and the gild organisation. The Black Death and the heavy taxation entailed by the Hundred Years’ War dealt a heavy blow1 at the chartered towns.2 Contemporary records are full of the complaint of their decay, of ruined houses and streets unpaved, of harbours silted up and of population in decline. Even allowing for some exaggeration these records cannot be wholly disregarded. In 1433 Parliament allowed a rebate of Ł. 4,000 when voting a tenth and a fifteenth “in release and discharge3 of the poor towns, cities and burghs, desolate and wasted or destroyed or over greatly impoverished4 or else to the said tax5 greatly overcharged” and such remissions are common.

........................................................................................ There is evidence, too, that the raids of pirates were more frequent as a result of the

continued wars and there are many cases of towns as important as Southampton and Sandwich being stormed and burned by such raiders. Inside the towns the gilds were growing more exclusive and the apprenticeship system was ceasing to be a normal stage in the development of a craftsman and was being used to keep the gilds in the hands of a select minority. Under Henry IV it became illegal for any but free-holders with twenty shillings a year to apprentice their children.

The heavy burden of taxation and the rigid gild restrictions in the chartered towns had the effect of driving industry outside them into the village and suburbs. For all these reasons then, while many of the older towns were in a state of decay, new centres of production were springing up in villages, some of which in time became themselves towns, but with a new capitalist or semi-capitalist production, as industry was finding freedom, the medieval restrictions on usury were by now plainly outmoded and were generally disregarded.

Equally marked were the contrasts in the countryside. The nobles, who were losing those social functions that had been their justification in the earlier Middle Ages, had acquired in the French wars settled habits of violence,6 They were evolving on the one hand into modern landowners and on the other into gangster chiefs, each with his band of armed retainers, drawn from unemployed soldiers and those of the lesser gentry who had been unable to adept themselves to the changed conditions, men who regarded work as beneath their dignity and whose job was to terrorise weaker neighbours. In the feudal age the nobles had their own courts of law7. Now they used their armed followers to overwave and defy the local courts. Great nobles undertook to protect their followers from justice, and this practice, known as maintenance, became a permanent scandal. Nobody from Parliament down to the obscurest bench of magistrates was secure from the menace of these bands, whose open intimidation prevented verdicts being given against the interest of their employers. When a suit brought two such nobles into conflict the proceedings often ended in a pitched battle.8

........................................................................................

26

The situation is vividly portrayed in the “Paston Letters”, with their mixture of hard business sense and gangster politics. The same men who are growing rich by sheep fanning are seen carrying out armed raids against their neighbours and using every device known to the lawyer to trick these neighbours out of their estates.8 One of the most characteristic features of the age, and one which marks it off10 sharply from the age of feudalism was the wholesale perversion of the law by the ruling class for the end of11 lawlessness rather than the open disregard of law.

As they shed their social functions the new nobility developed a fantastic if superficial refinement of manners, an elaborate mask of pseudo-feudal behaviour hiding the reality of decay. Clothing and armour became increasingly ostentatious, gold and silver were made into plate and ornaments as the lords vied with each other to produce the most magnificent effect at court. Heraldry, the tournament, the elaboration of the code of chivalry reached their highest pitch just at the time when they were losing all relation to the business of war. This extravagance was at bottom12 the result of the gradual displacement of land by money as the prevailing form of property. While tenacious of their land and as eager as ever to add to their estates, the nobility were mere children where money was concerned as compared with the great merchants. The extravagance of the age enabled many of these merchants to secure a financial hold upon13 the nobility through usury, and some were able themselves to enter the ranks of the nobles. The de la Pole Family, for example, were originally Hull merchants.

Both merchants and nobility were far more literate than their ancestors had been. Humphrey Duke of Gloucester collected one of the greatest libraries of the time, and the Earl of Worcester, famous even in the Wars of the Roses for his brutality, was equally noted for his culture and scholarship.

It was this new literate class, coming into existence all over Europe, that provided the conditions necessary for the invention of printing. The former literate class, the clergy was self-sufficing in the production of books, the copying of manuscripts being one of the main occupations of monastic life. The lay reading public14 of the Fifteenth Century, besides being much larger, was composed of people who were far too busy to produce their own books and the professional copyists were too slow and too few to keep pace with15 the steadily increasing demand.

The first books produced by Caxton in England were mainly of leisure type to suit the needs of this new public. His first book was the “Histories of Troye” and “The Dictes and Sayings of the Philosophers” (1477), (the first book printed in England), Malory’s “Morte d’Arthur” and Chaucer’s poems, were all of this class. In the next generation the bourgeoisie began to use the press as a weapon, and during the Protestant Reformation a torrent of religious and political polemical works appeared, spreading the ideas of the reformers among a far wider circle than would have otherwise been reached.

The disorder and internal feuds of the Fifteenth Century seem to have been curiously limited in their scope. While the nobles and their followers fought among themselves the rest of the nation was but little disturbed, even at the height of16 the Wars of the Roses. The Chief Justice Fortescue, writing in exile after the Battle of Towton, compares the general insecurity and misery in France with England, “where no man sejourneth17 in another man’s house without the love and leave of the good man”. Perhaps, as exiles will, he exaggerates the happiness of the land he was forced to leave, but it is clear that the wars which bulk so large in the history of the time were the work and the concern of a very small minority of professional fighters.

........................................................................................ There was probably at this time a larger proportion of small peasant farmers, cultivating

their lands as freeholders or tenants, than at any other time in English history. Their prosperity can be judged from the steady rise in the price of land, doubling during this period from ten to

27

twenty years purchase. The increase in population, the expanding market for wool and the generally steady level of prices all contributed towards the prosperity of the peasantry.

The labourers, benefiting from falling food prices, enjoyed wages that were relatively high. Under the Statute of Labourers they were fixed at threepence or fourpence a day, and the wages actually paid may have been even higher, though there is no means of telling how regular was the employment at these rates.18 A man hired by the year received 20s.8.d. in addition to19 his food and lodgings and a woman was paid 14s. Both the labourers and the peasant farmers were taking up spinning and weaving as domestic industries, and it is probably this at least as much as the condition of agriculture that made the age one of greater prosperity for them than those which preceded and followed it.

Thus, both the chaos and the prosperity of the Fifteenth Century were equally real and arose from a common cause, the transition from feudal to bourgeois society. The temporary growth of peasant agriculture was the result of the decline of the manorial organisation, taking place in a period when the accumulation of capital was insufficient to allow the development of a fully capitalist agriculture. Once this accumulation reached the necessary level, as it did in the next century, the extinction of the peasant farmer was inevitable. With the increase of the wool industry and of merchant and usurers’ capital this accumulation was going on rapidly and began to make itself felt even before the close of the Fifteenth Century.

In the same way, the anarchy of the period was due to the decline of feudalism and of the form of State power which had developed out of feudalism. The bourgeoisie, though becoming more numerous, were not yet strong enough to form the basis for a powerful, bureaucratic monarchy, and the local administration was not strong enough to stand up to the great nobles, a few of whom were more powerful individually than any of the feudal barons had ever been in England. The internal wars that resulted had the effect of destroying the power of these nobles, who perished in an unsuccessful attempt to secure control of the State apparatus. The struggle left both Crown and bourgeoisie relatively and absolutely stronger than before and ready to form an alliance very much to their mutual advantage.

A. L. MORTON from “A People’s History”

London, 1957 Vocabulary Practice 1. dealt a heavy blow = au dat o lovitură puternică 2. chartered towns = oraşe cu statut de privilegii 3. in release and discharge = pentru a înlesni şi a scuti de plată 4. over greatly impoverished = sărăcite pe măsură 5. the said tax = impozitul amintit 6. settled habits of violence = deprinderi de cruzime, obişnuinţa violenţei 7. courts of law = tribunale 8. pitched battle = luptă din cele mai violente 9. to trick the neighbours out of their estates = a alunga vecinii de pe moşiile lor 10. mark it off = o deosebeşte 11 .for the of = în scopul de a 12. at bottom = în fond, în esenţă 13. to secure a financial hold upon = a reduce la o stare de dependenţă financiară 14. the lay reading public = cititorii laici 15. to keep place with = a tine pas cu 16. at the height of = în toiul 17. where no man sejourneth (sejourns) = unde nici un om nu rămâne / nu zăboveşte

28

18. at these rates = în aceste condiţii 19. in addition to = pe lângă 20. was due to = se datora 21. to stand up to = să reziste, să înfrunte Word study deal 1. With with attend to, cope with, handle, manage, oversee, see to, take care of, treat 2. With with concern, consider, treat (of) 3. With with act, behave, conduct oneself 4. bargain, buy and sell, do business, negotiate, sell, stock, trade, traffic, treat (with) charter 1. bond, concession, contract, deed, document, franchise, indenture, licence, permit,

prerogative, privilege, right 2. authorize, commission, employ, hire, lease, rent, sanction discharge 1. absolve, acquit, allow to go, clear, exonerate, free, liberate, pardon, release, set free 2. cashier, discard, dismiss, eject, expel, fire (Inf.), give (someone) the sack (Inf.), oust,

remove, sack (Inf.) 3. detonate, explode, fire, let off, set off, shoot 4. disembogue, dispense, emit, empty, excrete, exude, give off, gush, leak, ooze, pour

forth, release, void 5. disburden, off-load, remove, unburden, unload 6. clear, honour, meet, pay, relieve, satisfy, settle, square up tax 1. assessment, charge, contribution, customs, duty, excise, imposition, impost, levy, rate,

tariff, tithe, toll, tribute 2. burden, demand, drain, load, pressure, strain, weight court 1. cloister, courtyard, piazza, plaza, quad (Inf.), quadrangle, square, yard 2. hall, manor, palace 3. attendants, cortege, entourage, retinue, royal household, suite, train 4. bar, bench, court of justice, lawcourt, seat of judgment, tribunal 5. addresses, attention, homage, respects, suit to secure 1. acquire, come by, gain, get, get hold of, land (Inf.), make sure of, obtain, pick up,

procure, win possession of 2. attach, batten down, bolt, chain, fasten, fix, lash, lock, lock up, make fast, moor,

padlock, rivet, tie up 3. assure, ensure, guarantee, insure lay 1. laic, laical, nonclerical, secular 2. amateur, inexpert, nonprofessional, nonspecialist 3. lay ballad, lyric, ode, poem, song

29

height 1. altitude, elevation, highness, loftiness, stature, tallness 2. apex, apogee, crest, crown, elevation, hill, mountain, peak, pinnacle, summit, top,

vertex, zenith 3. acme, dignity, eminence, exaltation, grandeur, loftiness, prominence 4. climax, culmination, extremity, limit, maximum, ne plus ultra, ultimate, utmost degree,

uttermost due(adj.) 1. in arrears, outstanding, owed, owing, payable, unpaid 2. appropriate, becoming, bounden, deserved, fit, fitting, just, justified, merited,

obligatory, proper, requisite, right, rightful, suitable, well-earned 3. adequate, ample, enough, plenty of, sufficient 4. expected, expected to arrive, scheduled due(adv.) dead, direct, directly, exactly, straight, undeviatingly due(n) comeuppance (SI.), deserts, merits, prerogative, privilege, right(s)

30

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 6 6. THE BOURGEOIS REVOLUTION

(1642–1646) CROMWELL Born in the closing years of Elizabeth’s reign, the child of a cadet of the great house of the

Cromwells of Hinghiabrook, and of kin through their mothers with Hampden and St. John, Oliver had been recalled by his father’s death from a short stay at Cambridge to the little family estate at Huntingdon, which he quitted for a farm at St, Ives. We have already seen his mood during the years of personal ride, as he dwelt in “prolonging” and “blackness”1 amidst fancies of coming death, the melancholy which formed the ground of his nature feeding itself on the inaction of the time. But his energy made itself felt the moment the tyranny was over. His father had sat, with three of his uncles, in the later Parliaments of Elizabeth. Oliver had himself been returned to that of 1628, and the town of Cambridge sent him as its representative to the Short Parliament as to the Long. It is in the latter that a courtier, Sir Philip Warwick, gives us our first glimpse of his actual appearance. “I came into the House one morning, well clad and perceived a gentleman speaking whom I knew not,2 very ordinarily apparelled, for it was a plain cloth suit, which seemed to have been made by an ill country tailor.3 His linen was plain, and not very clean; and I remember a speck or two of blood upon his little band, which was not much larger than his collar. His hat was without a hat-band. His stature was of a good size; his sword stuck close to his side; his countenance swollen and reddish; his voice sharp and untuneable, and his eloquence full of fervour”. He was already „much hearkened unto”4, but his power was to assert itself in deeds rather than in words. Men of his own time marked him out from all others by the epithet of Ironside.

CROMWELL’S BRIGADE He appeared at the head of a troop of his own raising5 at Edgehill; but with the eye of a

born soldier lie at once saw the blot in the army of Essex. “A set of poor tapsters and town apprentices,” he warned Hampden, “would never fight against men of honour;” and he pointed to religious enthusiasm as the one weapon which could meet the chivalry of the Cavalier. Even to Hampden the plan seemed impracticable; but the regiment of a thousand men which Cromwell raised for the Association of the Eastern Counties was formed strictly of “men of religion.” He spent his fortune freely on the task he set himself.6 “The business... hath had of me in money between eleven and twelve hundred pounds, therefore my private estate can do little to help the public ... I have little money of my own (left) to help my soldiers.” But they were “a lovely company,” he tells his friends with soldierly pride. No blasphemy, drinking, disorder, or impiety were suffered in their ranks. “Not a man swears but he pays his twelve pence.” Nor was his choice of “men of religion” the only innovation Cromwell introduced into his new regiment. The social traditions which restricted command to men of birth were disregarded. “It may be,” he wrote, in answer to complaints from the commitee of the Association, “it provokes your spirit7 to see such plain men made captains of horse.8 It had been well that men of honour and birth had entered into their employments; but why do they not appear? But seeing it is necessary the work must go on, better plain men than none; but best to have men patient of wants,9 faithful and conscientious in their employment, and such,

I hope these will approve themselves”10. The words paint Cromwell’s temper accurately enough; he is far more of 11 the practical soldier than of the reformer ; though his genius

31

already breaks in upon his aristocratic and conservative sympathies, and catches glimpses12 of the social revolution to which the war was drifting. “I had rather,” he once burst out impatiently, “have a plain russet-coated captain,13 that knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, than what you call a gentleman, and is nothing else. I honour a gentleman that is so indeed!” he ends with a characteristic return to his more common mood of feeling. The same practical temper broke out in a more startling innovation.

CROMWELL AND THE DISSIDENTS Bitter as had been his hatred of the bishops, and strenuously as he had worked to bring

about a change in Church government, Cromwell, like most of the Parliamentary leaders, seems to have been content with the new Presby-terianism, and the Presbyterians were more than content with him. Lord Manchester “suffered him to guide the army at his pleasure.” “The man, Cromwell,” writes the Scotchman Baillie, “is a very wise and active head, universally well beloved as religious and stout.” But as yet he was busier with his new regiment than with theories of Church and State; and his horsemen were no sooner in action than they proved themselves such soldiers as the war had never seen yet. “Truly they were never beaten at all,” their leader said proudly at its close. At Winceby fight they charged “singing psalms,” cleared Lincolnshire of the Cavaliers, and freed the eastern counties from all danger from Newcastle’s partisans. At Marston Moor they faced and routed Ruppert’s chivalry. At Newbury it was only Manchester’s reluctance that hindered them from completing the ruin of Charles.

Cromwell had shown his capacity for organization in the creation of his regiment; his military genius had displayed itself at Marston Moor. Newbury first raised him into a political leader. “Without a more speedy, vigorous, and effective prosecution of the war,” he said to the Commons after his quarrel with Manchester, “casting off all lingering proceedings, like those of soldiers of fortune14 beyond sea to spin out a war, we shall make the kingdom weary of us, and hate the name of a Parliament.” But under the leaders who at present conducted it a vigorous conduct of the war was hopeless. They were, in Cromwell’s plain words, “afraid to conquer.” They desired not to crush Charles, but to force him back, with as much of his old strength remaining as might be, to the position of a constitutional King. The old loyalty, too, clogged their enterprise; they shrank from the taint of treason. “If the King be beaten,” Manchester urged at Newbury, “he will still be king; if he beat us he will hang us all for traitors.” “If I met the King in battle,” Cromwell said, according to a later story, “I would fire my pistol at the King as at another.” The army, too, as he long ago urged at Edgehill, was not an army to conquer with. Now, as then, he urged that till the whole force was new modelled and placed under a stricter discipline, “they must not expect any notable success in anything they went about.” But the first step in such a reorganization must be a change of officers.

THE SELF-DENYING ORDINANCE The army was led and officered by members of the two Houses, and the Self-denying

Ordinance,15 as it was introduced by Cromwell and Vane, declared the tenure of military or civil offices incompatible with a seat in either. The long and bitter resistance which this measure met before it was finally passed in a modified form was justified at a later time by the political results which followed the rupture of the tie which had hitherto bound the army to the Parliament. But the drift of public opinion16 was too strong to be withstood. The passage of the Ordinance brought about the retirement of Essex, Manchester, and Waller; and the new organization of the army went rapidly, on under a new commander-in-chief, Sir Thomas Fairfax, the hero of the long contest in Yorkshire, and who had been raised into fame by his victory at Nantwich, and his bravery at Marston Moor. But behind Fairfax stood Cromwell; and the principles on which Cromwell had formed his brigade were carried out on a larger

32

scale in the “New Model.” The one aim was to get together twenty thousand “honest” men. “Be careful,” Cromwell had written, “what captains of horse you choose, what men be mounted. A few honest men are better than numbers. If you choose godly honest men to be captains of horse, honest men will follow them.” The result was a curious medley of men of different ranks among the officers of the New Model. The bulk of those in high command remained men of noble or gentle blood, Montagues, Pickerings, Fortescues, Sheffields, Sidneys, and the like. But side by side with these, though in far smaller proportion, were seen officers like Ewer, who had been a serving-man, like Okey, who had been a drayman, or Rainsborough, who had been a “skipper at sea”. A result hardly less notable was the youth of the officers. Among those in high command there were few who, like Cromwell, had passed middle age. Fairfax was but thirty-three, and most of his colonels were even younger. Equally strange was the mixture of religions in its ranks; though a large proportion of the infantry was composed of pressed recruits,17 the cavalry was for the most part strongly Puritan, and in that part of the army especially dissidence of every type had gained a firm foothold.

JOHN RICHARD GREEN from A Short History of the English People

(The Civil War) London, 1933

Vocabulary Practice 1. as he dwelt in “prolonging” and “blackness” = cum rămânea absorbit în lungi meditaţii

şi gânduri sumbre 2. whom 1 knew not = whom I didn’t know 3. ill country tailor = prost croitor de ţară 4. much harkened unto = ascultat cu atenţie 5. of his own raising = formată de el, recrutată şi pregătită de el 6. on the task he set himself = în slujba ţelului pe care-l avea 7. it provokes your spirit = te revoltă 8. captains of horse = căpitani de cavalerie 9. patient of wants = răbdători la lipsuri 10. these will approve themselves = aceştia se vor afirma 11 . he is far more of = este mai degrabă 12. catches glimpses = lasă să se întrevadă 13. a plain russet-coated captain = căpitan îmbrăcat cu o tunică roşie simplă 14. soldiers of fortune = soldaţi mercenari 15. Self-Denying Ordinance = Actul renunţării de bună voie 16. the drift of public opinion = pulsul opiniei publice 17. pressed recruits = soldaţi recrutaţi cu forţa Word study spirit 1. air, breath, life, life force, psyche, soul, vital spark 2. attitude, character, complexion, disposition, essence, humour, outlook, quality, temper,

temperament 3. animation, ardour, backbone, courage, dauntlessness, earnestness, energy, enterprise,

enthusiasm, fire, force, gameness, grit, guts (Inf.), life, liveliness, mettle, resolution, sparkle, spunk (Inf.), stoutheartedness, vigour, warmth, zest

4. motivation, resolution, resolve, will, willpower

33

5. atmosphere, feeling, gist, humour, tenor, tone 6. essence, intent, intention, meaning, purport, purpose, sense, substance 7. Plural feelings, frame of mind, humour, mood, morale 8. apparition, ghost, phantom, shade (Literary), shadow, spectre, spook (Inf.), sprite,

vision glimpse brief view, glance, look, peek, peep, quick look, sight, sighting, squint drift 1. accumulation, bank, heap, mass, mound, pile 2. course, current, direction, flow, impulse, movement, rush, sweep, trend 3. Fig. aim, design, direction, gist, implication, import, intention, meaning, object,

purport, scope, significance, tendency, tenor

34

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 7 7. ON THE AMERICAN WAR

“This, my lords, is a perilous and tremendous moment; it is not a time for adulation ; the smoothness of flattery cannot save us in this rugged and awful crisis. It is now necessary to instruct the throne in the language of truth1 We must, if possible, dispel the delusion and darkness which envelop it, and display in its full danger and genuine colours, the ruin which is brought to our doors. Can ministers still presume to expect support in their infatuation? Can parliament be so dead to2 their dignity and duty as to give their support to measures thus obtruded and forced upon them; measures, my lords, which have reduced this late flourishing empire to scorn and contempt? But yesterday, and England might have stood against the world: now none so poor to do her reverence! The people whom we at first despised and rebels, but whom we now acknowledge as enemies, are abetted against you, supplied with every military store3, have their interest consulted4, and their ambassadors entertained, by your inveterate enemy; and ministers do not, and dare not, interpose with dignity or effect. The desperate state of our army abroad is in part known. No man more highly esteems and honours the English troops than I do; I know their virtues and their valour; I know they can achieve anything but impossibilities; and I know that the conquest of English America is an impossibility. You cannot, my lords, you cannot conquer America. What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst; but we know that, in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much. You may swell every expense, accumulate every assistance and extend your traffic to the shambles of every German despot; your attempts will be for ever vain and impotent – doubly so, indeed, from this mercenary aid on which you rely; for it irritates, to an incurable resentment, the minds of your adversaries, to overrun them with the mercenary sons of rapine and plunder, devoting them and their possessions to the rapacity and hireling cruelty. If I were an American as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country,. I never would lay down my arms: Never, never, never”

LORD CHATHAM Vocabulary Practice 1. in the language of truth = în spiritul adevărului 2. so dead to = atât de indiferenţi faţă de 3. military store = potenţial militar 4. have their interest consulted = îşi cunosc interesele Word study truth 1. accuracy, actuality, exactness, fact, factuality, factualness, genuineness, legitimacy,

precision, reality, truthfulness, validity, veracity, verity 2. candour, constancy, dedication, devotion, dutifulness, faith, faithfulness, fidelity,

frankness, honesty, integrity, loyalty, naturalism, realism, uprightness 3. axiom, certainty, fact, law, maxim, proven principle, reality, truism, verity store 1. abundance, accumulation, cache, fund, hoard, lot, mine, plenty, plethora, provision,

quantity, reserve, reservoir, stock, stockpile, supply, wealth

35

2. chain store, department store, emporium, market, mart, outlet, shop, supermarket 3. depository, repository, storehouse, storeroom, warehouse 4. set store by: appreciate, esteem, hold in high regard, prize, think highly of, value interest 1. affection, attention, attentiveness, attraction, concern, curiosity, notice, regard,

suspicion, sympathy 2. concern, consequence, importance, moment, note, relevance, significance, weight

activity, diversion, hobby, leisure 3. activity, pastime, preoccupation, pursuit, relaxation 4. advantage, benefit, gain, good, profit 5. in the interest of: for the sake of, on behalf of, on the part of, profitable to, to the

advantage of 6. authority, claim, commitment, influence, investment, involvement, participation,

portion, right, share, stake 7. Often plural: affair, business, care, concern, matter

36

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 8 8. ROMANIAN HISTORY

The Latin term dominus (ruler, absolute leader, supreme authority), which was permanently present in the European mediaeval society and in the Romanian society as well was further transmitted to the central institution in the Romanian Principalities, the reign evidencing its Romanian origin1. Up to defining the character and competence of reign as we can find for the XIV-th centuries, it was a long way, marked by the evolution stages of Romanian society. From simple forms of organizations to the level of village communities ruled by boni homines (good old people) they reached the form of territorial communities, within which majores terrae appeared ( rulers, landowners), the judge and princes.

At this level the administrative and judicial competences were firstly imposed. Further on, as a result of the principalities appearance, the political and military functions fulfilled by princes were defined. At the same time with the setting-up of independent states these competences, to a certain extent religious, the central institution as well as the other monarchies being considerate divine.

The forms of organization and the Romanian institutions did not know only domestic development, as the Romanian society was influenced along its evolution by several external factors: the Bizantz and the South-slavo-czardoms in the south, the catholic Kingdoms of Hungary and Poland in the West and North and the Cumanian and Tartar presences in the East. They thought that the external influences, although for long period sometimes, could not actually change the Romania character or reign. Forming certain features, they rushed their evolution, and its definition as a principal, fundamental institution of the state. Meanwhile, they established the relationship of the reign with the fundamental institutions: the Church and the Social Classes thus settling the place and role of reign as a central, political institution of the state.

By defining the relationship between reign and the other central institutions, it was possible to include is as one of the two types of Christian monarchies in Europe; the state monarchy (royalty and empire) specific to the Catholic Occident and Byzantine imperial aristocracy (with its derivatives: czardoms and despotdoms) specific to the Orthodox Christian World. The external influences we were talking about contributed to the typological forming of the Romanian reign, so that their intensity and paternity enabled a change in the typological forming of the institution.

Under religious-political circumstances in the 12th Century, the first state Romanian organization firstly appeared in Transilvania. The Hungarian Kings, under the influence of the Roman Church and of the Occident, for example the principality. Although the initial form of state organization was used again the voievodate – which was controlled by the royalty liberties, the Romanian form Transilvania shifted the centre of gravity of the states first of all to the South then to the East of the Carpathians, thus greatly contributing to the establishment and organization of Wallachia and Moldavia in the 14th Century, maintaining as a central institution the voievodate.

The Wallachian Voievodate, for a period under the angevine and catholic influences initially started up to develop towards a class monarchy of the occidental type. After the emancipation of Wallachia compared to the Kingdom of Hungary and the gradual abolishment of the catholic influences, the Wallachian Voievodes mostly oriented towards orthodoxy and Byzantz, establishing connections with the south-danubian dynasties and with the Orthodox hierarchs. At the same time with the foundation of the two metropolitan churches and the monarchal organization the principality of Wallachia changed into a reign, being consequently

37

admitted by the Constantinopol Patriarchate. After the Byzantine model and that of the Balkan States the Wallachian reign even more asserted itself as an autocrat monarchy of the Byzantine model, imposing its authority on the other state institutions. By virtue of the new prerogetives offered by the institution which they represented the Wallachian Voievodes tried to affirm as absolute sovereigns, autocrats, evidencing their new position by entitling, arenga from diplomatic papers and the use of the imperial signs: the crown, the sceptre, the diadem, and the hiamid. In order to easily impose their authority on the other institutions and on their subjects, they set up a new body, Voievode’s Council, different from reign council. While the reign council was and still remained a representative body of the classes, with some political, juridical and legal competence: the election of voievodes, the carrying out of some general political measurements, the acceptance of several treaties and joint judgement with the voievode of some special cases the voievode’s council continued to develop as an executive-judicial body being at the disposal and under the control of voievodes and made up of people close to him. Furhter on, the nobility (boyards and Vlastelines) imposed their control on high-offices and on the voievode’s council. In this way, they tried to influence the voievode’s decisions and to limit authority. They never thought of limiting the reign’s powers. Being a divine monarchy, imperial in character, its statute could not be amended without bringing a touch to the order constituted in the state. That is why several voievodes lacking personality and authority enjoyed the same respect from their subjects, and it happened the same to the voievodes having personality and authority. In fact it was the institution which was respected and the voievode as its representative. That is why the boyards had to be obedient, in an unconditional way to their voievodes, whom they supportedand they wanted to protect their interests. That also explains the voievodes’ out-bursts of authority.

After the setting up of the Ottoman domination in the Balkan area and the disappearance of the Byzantine Empire simultaneously with the imposing of the Ottoman domination on Wallachia, voievodes started even more to assert themselves as defenders of the Orthodox Church and the Christians in the Ottoman Empire. They took liberty of the judicial and religious rights granted by the sultans to the Church and the Patriarchate in Constantinopol. As defenders of orthodoxy, the Wallachian voievodes took over a part of the political, juridical and religious inheritance of the Byzantine emperors, with the support of the Church and even the silent agreement of the Sublime Porte. That is why in the 16th Century, they asserted as successors of Byzantz and polarizing around them the liberation hopes of the Christians in the Balkans. By the end of the 16th Century, under the circumstances of the Ottoman domination accentuation, the boyard and the clergy involved even more in the governing process, ending by imposing the following century a form of government which did not alter the autocratic- imperial character or reign in Wallachia.

In Moldavia, where the Hungarian and Polish influences were strong and permanent and Catholicism better set up then in Wallachia, the central institution developed in a different way. It could be defined as monarchy of circumstances, a dukedom (as it was admitted and hierarchizized by the papacy) in which the duke was a prince, not a ruler. Compared to Wallachia, the Byzantine influences in Moldavia were much waker at first and were different. Although the Moldavian voievods tried to impose on the central institution another character calling it reign and entitling themselves as voievods, the institution developed more into a form of royalty controlled by the nobility and Church. This fact is noticed entitling, which has a simple form, close to royal one, lacking the formula of arrenga from office papers and from the position of the voievods as to boyards and church, as they were by no means absolute rulers, even if they sustained, and more than that, they wanted to. By the end of this period they started to introduce the formula “arenga”. Compared to Wallachia the reign in Moldavia didn’t have an independent evolution, being almost always under the domination of its suzerains Hungary and Poland either directly or by the influence of boyards, who were also direct vassals

38

of neighboring Kings. The struggle between pretenders, who were supported by Hungary and Poland contributed to the maintenance of the reign under the command of boyards and Church.

Starting with the reign of Stephan and Great and up to Petru Rares an authoritative domination was proclaimed in Moldavia imposed by voievods, but this didn’t mean that the reign lost its character of class monarchy. The voievods tried and managed to a great extent to impose their control and boyards and church.

Starting with the reign of Stephan and Great and up to the reign of Petru Rares an authoritary regime was imposed by voievods was established in Moldavia, but this fact did not have any influence on monarchy of classes4. The voievods tried and succeded to a great extent to have command on the boyards and church. But the vassal relationship of Moldavia as to Hungary and Poland as well as the instauration of the Ottoman domination, stopped the consolidation of the authority regime and the evolution of reign towards autocracy, although they tried to fulfil their wish in many ways.

Compared to Wallachia, in Moldavia, the voievode’s counsel was not set up. From the people’s council5 (the meeting of the classes representatives) the reigns council, from the beginning supervised by the boyards also imposed its control on the offices and decided for themselves to speak and take decisions on behalf of the other classes and boyards. In Moldavia, the boyards seem to belong to the reign. It shares the power of influence with the voievod, has right control on him, and accepts the political documents for the home and foreign policy, separately concluding guarantee treaties. For these reasons the Moldavian reign loses its divine character and even the voievodes become sacred by Chrism consecrated oil, they are not looked upon as absolute rulers, unless they can state the authority, and not even these circumstances (for example the cases when the boyards betrayed the voievodes). In Wallachia, the boyards are separated from the reign, which remains a sacred institution, and also intangible. The Wallachian boyards are more conforming than guaranteeing the soverignes’ documents, although they sometimes can have an influence on their decisions and even have control on them.

In Moldavia, after the domination of the Ottoman Empire, changes started to take place. The authoritative regime of some voievods was simultaneously replaced by a nobiliary regime of the boyards, the same as in Poland. Paradoxically, at the same time with the Ottoman domination by the end of the XVI-Th century, the Wallachian reign started to have some imperial characteristics, which start to get it closer to Wallachia. The entrance of Moldavia in the Ottoman’s empire sphere of influence favored the orientation of the state towards Bizantz and the south-danubian world. Due to the dynastic connections with the Wallachian voievodes and with the influentional Christian families in Balkans and the Levantino- Italian World, the voievodes of Moldavia started to be considered by the Constantinopol Patriarchy defenders of orthodoxy. That is why by the end of the XVI-Th century and especially in the following one, they will be able to display the same imperial ceremony6 as well as their neighbors across the Milkov, even if the reign kept its character of monarchy of classes and had vassal relationship with Poland.

Although, the rain was from the beginning and still remained a Romanian institution, the different influences that had an influence on it, determined typological limits and different evolutions in Wallachia and Moldavia. The different character of the reign in the two principalities, also express something else. Being situated at the Bordee between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, the Romanian States got influences from both directions. They were felt in the organization and character of the home institutions, by which through original forms and in another plan that unity of the Christian World, which was broken in 1504, was achieved, and which wanted itself to be remade. That’s why, we can talk about distinctive character of the Romanian reign. It did not accept only the influence of the Occident or Bizantz, it blended in an original synthesis the two directions. That gives originality to the reign.

39

The position taken by the Romanian voievods between the Christian princes of Europe express the same thing. On the one hand the special care towards Orthodoxy and its values, which appeared even during the Ottoman domination, enabling the voievods to evidence themselves as followers of the Byzantz and to make evident the autocratic statue of the reign: on the other hand the permanent connections with the Occident and the involvement in the great European problems, especially those associated with stopping the Ottoman expansion. Since then, their permanent wish to be integrated in the values of the Occidental system and accept the influences from the Occident, even of they contributed to changing the character of some institutions, includes the reign. The position if the Romanian voievodes of defenders of oriental Christianity and defenders of Orthodoxy, as well as heirs of Byzantz, was maintained and even evidenced in the XVI-XVII centuries up to the appearance of Rusia as protector of the Christians in the East and the proclamation of Moskow, “the third Rome”, although the politico- economic domination of the Suplime Porte towards them was becoming very serious. We could even say, that even the Sublime Porte made sometimes ose of the position of the Romanian voievodes in the Christian World, in order to put into practice their European projects. The affirmation of Rusia as a great power marked the closing of flourishing epoch in the evolution of the Romanian reign, when the imperial Romanian -Byzantine idea was continuated through Romanian voievods, after which the fall marked by the Turkish- phanariot regime followed.

MIHAIL M. ANDREESCU form “Puterea Domniei în Ţara Românească şi Moldova”

Bucureşti, 1999 Translated by Argentina Velea

Vocabulary Practice 1. the reign evidencing its Romanian origin = domnia evidenţiind originea română 2. to the level of village communities = la nivelul obştilor săteşti 3. the principalities appearance = apariţia voievodatelor 4. monarchy of classes = monarhie de stări 5. the people’s council = sfatul de obşte 6. to display the same imperial ceremony = pentru a afişa aceeaşi pompă imperială Word study reign ascendancy, command, control, dominion, empire, hegemony, influence, monarchy, power, rule, sovereignty, supremacy, sway community 1. association, body politic, brotherhood, commonwealth, company, district, general

public, locality, people, populace, population, public, residents, society, state 2. affinity, agreement, identity, likeness, sameness, similarity class caste, category, classification, collection, denomination, department, division, genre, genus, grade, group, grouping, kind, league, order, rank, set, sort, species, sphere, status, type, value display 1. betray, demonstrate, disclose, evidence, evince, exhibit, expose, manifest, open, open

to view, present, reveal, show, unveil

40

2. expand, extend, model, open out, spread out, stretch out, unfold, unfurl 3. boast, flash (Inf.), flaunt, flourish, parade, show off, vaunt ceremony 1. commemoration, function, observance, parade, rite, ritual, service, show, solemnities 2. ceremonial, decorum, etiquette, form, formal courtesy, formality, niceties, pomp,

propriety, protocol

41

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 9 9. Ancient Accounts of Arabia

Herodotus: The Histories, Book III, c. 430 BCE The Arabs keep such pledges more religiously than almost any other people. They plight

faith with the forms following. When two men would swear a friendship, they stand on each side of a third: he with a sharp stone makes a cut on the inside of the hand of each near the middle finger, and, taking a piece from their dress, dips it in the blood of each, and moistens therewith seven stones lying in the midst, calling the while on Bacchus and Urania. After this, the man who makes the pledge commends the stranger (or the citizen, if citizen he be) to all his friends, and they deem themselves bound to stand to the engagement. They have but these two gods, to wit, Bacchus and Urania; and they say that in their mode of cutting the hair, they follow Bacchus. Now their practice is to cut it in a ring, away from the temples. Bacchus they call in their language Orotal, and Urania, Alilat... .There is a great river in Arabia, called the Corys, which empties itself into the Erythraean sea. The Arabian king, they say, made a pipe of the skins of oxen and other beasts, reaching from this river all the way to the desert, and so brought the water to certain cisterns which he had dug in the desert to receive it. It is a twelve days’ journey from the river to this desert tract. And the water, they say, was brought through three different pipes to three separate places.. . .The Arabs brought every year a thousand talents of frankincense. ...

Arabia is the last of inhabited lands towards the south, and it is the only country which produces frankincense, myrrh, cassia, cinnamon, and laudanum. The Arabians do not get any of these, except the myrrh, without trouble. The frankincense they procure by means of the gum styrax, which the Greeks obtain from the Phoenicians; this they burn, and thereby obtain the spice. For the trees which bear the frankincense are guarded by winged serpents, small in size, and of varied colors, whereof vast numbers hang about every tree. They are of the same kind as the serpents that invade Egypt; and there is nothing but the smoke of the styrax which will drive them from the trees. The Arabians say that the whole world would swarm with these serpents, if they were not kept in check in the way in which I know that vipers Such, then, is the way in which the Arabians obtain their frankincense; their manner of collecting the cassia is the following: They cover all their body and their face with the hides of oxen and other skins, leaving only holes for the eyes, and thus protected go in search of the cassia, which grows in a lake of no great depth. All round the shores and in the lake itself there dwell a number of winged animals, much resembling bats, which screech horribly, and are very valiant. These creatures they must keep from their eyes all the while that they gather the cassia.

Still more wonderful is the mode in which they collect the cinnamon. Where the wood grows, and what country produces it, they cannot tell–only some, following probability, relate that it comes from the country in which Bacchus was brought up. Great birds, they say, bring the sticks which we Greeks, taking the word from the Phoenicians, call cinnamon, and carry them up into the air to make their nests.

These are fastened with a sort of mud to a sheer face of rock, where no foot of man is able to climb. So the Arabians, to get the cinnamon, use the following artifice. They cut all the oxen and asses and beasts of burthen that die in their land into large pieces, which they carry with them into those regions, and Place near the nests: then they withdraw to a distance, and the old birds, swooping down, seize the pieces of meat and fly with them up to their nests; which, not being able to support the weight, break off and fall to the ground. Hereupon the Arabians return and collect the cinnamon, which is afterwards carried from Arabia into other countries.

42

Concerning the spices of Arabia let no more be said. The whole country is scented with them, and exhales an odor marvelously sweet. There are also in Arabia two kinds of sheep worthy of admiration, the like of which is nowhere else to be seen; the one kind has long tails, not less than three cubits in length, which, if they were allowed to trail on the ground, would be bruised and fall into sores. As it is, all the shepherds know enough of carpentering to make little trucks for their sheep’s tails. The trucks are placed under the tails, each sheep having one to himself, and the tails are then tied down upon them. The other kind has a broad tail, which is a cubit across sometimes, are. .. .The Arabians wore the zeira, or long cloak, fastened about them with a girdle; and carried at their right side long bows, which when unstrung bent backwards.

Ammianus Marcellinus: The Roman History, Book XIV.iv.1-7., c. 380 CE Book XIV.4:

At this time also the Saracens, a race whom it is never desirable to have either for friends or enemies, ranging up and down the country, if ever they found anything, plundered it in a moment, like rapacious hawks who, if from on high they behold any prey, carry it off with a rapid swoop, or, if they fail in their attempt, do not tarry. And although, in recounting the career of the Prince Marcus, and once or twice subsequently, I remember having discussed the manners of this people, nevertheless I will now briefly enumerate a few more particulars concerning them.

Among these tribes, whose primary origin is derived from the cataracts of the Nile and the borders of the Blemmyae, all the men are warriors of equal rank; half naked, clad in colored cloaks down to the waist, overrunning different countries, with the aid of swift and active horses and speedy camels, alike in times of peace and war. Nor does any member of their tribe ever take plow in hand or cultivate a tree, or seek food by the tillage of the land; but they are perpetually wandering over various and extensive districts, having no home, no fixed abode or laws; nor can they endure to remain long in the same climate, no one district or country pleasing them for a continuance.

Their life is one continued wandering; their wives are hired, on special covenant, for a fixed time; and that there may be some appearance of marriage in the business, the intended wife, under the name of a dowry, offers a spear and a tent to her husband, with a right to quit him after a fixed day, if she should choose to do so. And it is inconceivable with what eagerness the individuals of both sexes give themselves up to matrimonial pleasures.

But as long as they live they wander about with such extensive and perpetual migrations, that the woman is married in one place, brings forth her children in another, and rears them at a distance from either place, no opportunity of remaining quiet being ever granted to her. They all live on venison, and are further supported on a great abundance of milk, and on many kinds of herbs, and on whatever birds they can catch by fowling. And we have seen a great many of them wholly ignorant of the use of either corn or wine.

Procopius of Caesarea, History of the Wars, c. 550 CE Book I.xix.1-16, 23-26; xx.1-13: The boundaries of Palestine extend toward the east to the sea which is called the Red Sea.

Now this sea, beginning at India, comes to an end at this point in the Roman domain. And there is a city called Aelas [modern Aqaba] on its shore, where the sea comes to an end, as I have said, and becomes a very narrow gulf. And as one sails into the sea from there [i.e., sailing Southwest, from Aqaba to the Red Sea], the Egyptian mountains lie on the right, extending toward the south; on the other side a country deserted by men extends northward to an indefinite distance; and the land on both sides is visible as one sails in as far as the island called Iotabe, not less than one thousand stades distant from the city of Aelas. On this island Hebrews had lived from of old in autonomy, but in the reign of this Justinian they have become subject to the Romans. From there on there comes a great open sea. And those who sail into this part of it no longer see the land on the right, but they always anchor along the left coast when night

43

comes on. For it is impossible to navigate in the darkness on this sea, since it is everywhere full of shoals. But there are harbors there and great numbers of them, not made by the hand of man, but by the natural contour of the land, and for this reason it is not difficult for mariners to find anchorage wherever they happen to be. This coast immediately beyond the boundaries of Palestine is held by Saracens, who have been settled from of old in the Palm Groves. These groves are in the interior, extending over a great tract of land, and there absolutely nothing else grows except palm trees. The Emperor Justinian had received these palm groves as a present from Abochorabus, the ruler of the Saracens there, and he was appointed by the emperor captain over the Saracens in Palestine. And he guarded the land from plunder constantly, for both to the barbarians over whom he ruled and no less to the enemy, Abochorabus always seemed a man to be feared and an exceptionally energetic fellow. Formally, therefore, the emperor holds the Palm Groves, but for him really to possess himself of any of the country there is utterly impossible. For a land completely destitute of human habitation and extremely dry lies between, extending to the distance of a ten days’ journey; moreover, the Palm Groves themselves are by no means worth anything, and Abochorabus only gave the form of a gift, and the emperor accepted it with full knowledge of the fact. So much then for the Palm Groves. Adjoining this people there are other Saracens in possession of the coast, who are called Maddeni [in modern Madyan] and who are subjects of the Omeritae. These Omeritae dwell in the land on the farther side of them on the shore of the sea [modern Yemen]. And beyond them many other nations are said to be settled as far as the man-eating Saracens. Beyond these are the nations of India.

For the sea which one traverses beyond this point as far as the shore and the city of Aelas has received the name of the Arabian Gulf, inasmuch as the country which extends from here to the limits of the city of Gaza used to be called in olden times Arabia, since the king of the Arabs had his palace in early times in the city of Petrae. Now the harbor of the Omeritae from they are accustomed to put to sea for the voyage to Ethiopia is called Bulicas [modern Al-Hudaydah?]; and at the end of the sail across the sea they always put in at the harbor of the Adulitae. But the city of Adulis [near modern Asmara] is removed from the harbor a distance of twenty stades (for it lacks only so much of being on the sea), while from the city of Auxomis it is a journey of twelve days.

All the boats which are found in India and on this sea are not made in the same manner as are other ships. For neither are they smeared with pitch, nor with any other substance, nor indeed are the planks fastened together by iron nails going through and through, but they are bound together with a kind of cording. The reason is not as most persons suppose, that there are certain rocks there which draw the iron to themselves (for witness the fact that when the Roman vessels sail from Aelas into this sea, although they are fitted with much iron, no such thing has ever happened to them), but rather because the Indians and the Ethiopians possess neither iron nor any other thing suitable for such purposes. Furthermore, they are not even able to buy any of these things from the Romans since this is explicitly forbidden to all by law; for death is the punishment for one who is caught. Such then is the description of the so-called Red Sea and of the land which lies on either side of it. . ..

At about the time of this war Ellesthaeus, the king of the Ethiopians, who was a Christian and a most devoted adherent of this faith, discovered that a number of the Omeritae on the opposite mainland [modern Yemen] were oppressing the Christians there outrageously; many of these rascals were Jews, and many of them held in reverence the old faith which men of the present day call Hellenic [i.e., pagan]. He therefore collected a fleet of ships and an army and came against them, and he conquered them in battle and slew both the king and many of the Omeritae. He then set up in his stead a Christian king, an Omeritae by birth, by name Esimiphaeus, and, after ordaining that he should pay a tribute to the Ethiopians every year, he returned to his home. In this Ethiopian army many slaves and all who were readily disposed to

44

crime were quite unwilling to follow the king back, but were left behind and remained there because of their desire for the land of the Omeritae; for it is an extremely goodly land.

These fellows at a time not long after this, in company with certain others, rose against the king Esimiphaeus and put him in confinement in one of the fortresses there, and established another king over the Omeritae, Abramus by name. Now this Abramus was a Christian, but a slave of a Roman citizen who was engaged in the business of shipping in the city of Adulis in Ethiopia. When Ellesthaeus learned this, he was eager to punish Abramus together with those who had revolted with him for their injustice to Esimiphaeus, and he sent against them an army of three thousand men with one of his relatives as commander. This army, once there, was no longer willing to return home, but they wished to remain where they were in a goodly land, and so without the knowledge of their commander they opened negotiations with Abramus; then when they came to an engagement with their opponents, just as the fighting began, they killed their commander and joined the ranks of the enemy, and so remained there. But Ellesthaeus was greatly moved with anger and sent still another army against them; this force engaged with Abramus and his men, and, after suffering a severe defeat in the battle, straightway returned home. Thereafter the king of the Ethiopians became afraid, and sent no further expeditions against Abramus. After the death of Ellesthaeus, Abramus agreed to pay tribute to the king of the Ethiopians who succeeded him, and in this way he strengthened his rule. But this happened at a later time. At that time, when Ellesthaeus was reigning over the Ethiopians, and Esimiphaeus over the Omeritae, the Emperor Justinian sent an ambassador, Julianus, demanding that both nations on account of their community of religion should make common cause with the Romans in the war against the Persians; for he purposed that the Ethiopians, by purchasing silk from India and selling it among the Romans, might themselves gain much money, while cause the Romans to profit in only one way, namely, that they be no longer compelled to pay over their money to their enemy (this is the silk of which they are accustomed to make the garments which of old the Greeks called “Medic,” but which at the present time they name “Seric” [from Lat. serica, as coming from the Chinese (Seres)]). As for the Omeritae, it was desired that they should establish Caďsus, the fugitive, as captain over the Maddeni, and with a great army of their own people and of the Maddene Saracens make an invasion into the land of the Persians. This Caďsus was by birth of the captain’s rank and an exceptionally able warrior, but he had killed one of the relatives of Esimiphaeus and was a fugitive in a land which is utterly destitute of human habitation.

So each king, promising to put this demand into effect, dismissed the ambassador, but neither one of them did the things agreed upon by them. For it was impossible for the Ethiopians to buy silk from the Indians, for the Persian merchants always locate themselves at the very harbors where the Indian ships first put in (since they inhabit the adjoining country), and are accustomed to buy the whole cargoes; and it seemed to the Omeritae a difficult thing to cross a country which was a desert and which extended so far that a long time was required for the journey across it, and then to go against such a people much more warlike than themselves. Later on Abramus too, when at length he had established his power most securely, promised the Emperor Justinian many times to invade the land of Persia, but only once began the journey and then straightway turned back. Such then were the relations which the Romans had with the Ethiopians and the Omeritae.

Edward Gibbon: General Observations on the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West from The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter 38 The Greeks, after their country had been reduced into a province, imputed the triumphs of

Rome, not to the merit, but to the FORTUNE, of the republic. The inconstant goddess, who so blindly distributes and resumes her favours, had now consented (such was the language of envious flattery) to resign her wings, to descend from her globe, and to fix her firm and

45

immutable throne on the banks of the Tiber.[1] A wiser Greek, who has composed, with a philosophic spirit, the memorable history of his own times, deprived his countrymen of this vain and delusive comfort by opening to their view the deep foundations of the greatness of Rome. [2] The fidelity of the citizens to each other, and to the state, was confirmed by the habits of education and the prejudices of religion. Honour, as well as virtue, was the principle of the republic; the ambitious citizens laboured to deserve the solemn glories of a triumph; and the ardour of the Roman youth was kindled into active emulation, as often as they beheld the domestic images of their ancestors. [3] The temperate struggles of the patricians and plebeians had finally established the firm and equal balance of the constitution; which united the freedom of popular assemblies with the authority and wisdom of a senate-and the executive powers of a regal magistrate. When the consul displayed the standard of the republic, each citizen bound himself, by the obligation of an oath, to draw his sword in the cause of his country, till he had discharged the sacred duty by a military service of ten years. This wise institution continually poured into the field the rising generations of freemen and soldiers; and their numbers were reinforced by the warlike and populous states of Italy, who, after a brave resistance, had yielded to the valour, and embraced the alliance, of the Romans. The sage historian, who excited the virtue of the younger Scipio and beheld the ruin of Carthage,[4] has accurately described their military system; their levies, arms, exercises, subordination, marches, encampments; and the invincible legion, superior in active strength to the Macedonian phalanx of Philip and Alexander. From these institutions of peace and war, Polybius has deduced the spirit and success of a people incapable of fear and impatient of repose. The ambitious design of conquest, which might have been defeated by the seasonable conspiracy of mankind, was attempted and achieved; and the perpetual violation of justice was maintained by the political virtues of prudence and courage. The arms of the republic, sometimes vanquished in battle, always victorious in war, advanced with rapid steps to the Euphrates, the Danube, the Rhine, and the Ocean; and the images of gold, or silver, or brass, that might serve to represent the nations and their kings, were successively broken by the iron monarchy of Rome. [5] The rise of a city, which swelled into an Empire, may deserve, as a singular prodigy, the reflection of a philosophic mind. But the decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness. Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest; and, as soon as time or accident had removed the artificial supports, the stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight. The story of its ruin is simple and obvious; and, instead of inquiring why the Roman empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted so long.

The victorious legions, who, in distant wars, acquired the vices of strangers and mercenaries, first oppressed the freedom of the republic, and afterwards violated the majesty of the purple. The emperors, anxious for their personal safety and the public peace, were reduced to the base expedient of corrupting the discipline which rendered them alike formidable to their sovereign and to the enemy; the vigour of the military government was relaxed, and finally dissolved, by the partial institutions of Constantine; and the Roman world was overwhelmed by a deluge of Barbarians. The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire; but this history has already shewn that the powers of government were divided rather than removed. The throne of Constantinople was erected in the East; while the West was still possessed by a series of emperors who held their residence in Italy and claimed their equal inheritance of the legions and provinces. This dangerous novelty impaired the strength, and fomented the vices, of a double reign; the instruments of an oppressive and arbitrary system were multiplied; and a vain emulation of luxury, not of merit, was introduced and supported between the degenerate successors of Theodosius. Extreme distress, which unites the virtue of a free people, embitters the factions of a declining monarchy. The hostile favourites of Arcadius and Honorius betrayed the republic to its common enemies; and the Byzantine court beheld with indifference, perhaps with pleasure, the disgrace of Rome, the

46

misfortunes of Italy, and the loss of the West. Under the succeeding reigns, the alliance of the two empires was restored; but the aid of the Oriental Romans was tardy, doubtful, and ineffectual; and the national schism of the Greeks and Latins was enlarged by the perpetual difference of language and manners, of interest, and even of religion. Yet the salutary event approved in some measure the judgment of Constantine. During a long period of decay, his impregnable city repelled the victorious armies of Barbarians, protected the wealth of Asia, and commanded, both in peace and war, the important straits which connect the Euxine and Mediterranean seas. The foundation of Constantinople more essentially contributed to the preservation of the East than to the ruin of the West.

As the happiness of a future life is the great object of religion, we may hear, without surprise or scandal, that the introduction, or at least the abuse, of Christianity had some influence on the decline and fall of the Roman empire. The clergy successfully preached the doctrines of patience and pusillanimity; the active virtues of society were discouraged; and the last remains of the military spirit were buried in the cloister; a large portion of public and private wealth was consecrated to the specious demands of charity and devotion; and the soldiers’ pay was lavished on the useless multitudes of both sexes, who could only plead the merits of abstinence and chastity. Faith, zeal, curiosity, and the more earthly passions of malice and ambition kindled the flame of theological discord; the church, and even the state, were distracted by religious factions, whose conflicts were sometimes bloody, and always implacable; the attention of the emperors was diverted from camps to synods; the Roman world was oppressed by a new species of tyranny; and the persecuted sects became the secret enemies of their country. Yet party-spirit, however pernicious or absurd, is a principle of union as well as of dissension. The bishops, from eighteen hundred pulpits, inculcated the duty of passive obedience to a lawful and orthodox sovereign; their frequent assemblies, and perpetual correspondence, maintained the communion of distant churches: and the benevolent temper of the gospel was strengthened, though confined, by the spiritual alliance of the Catholics. The sacred indolence of the monks was devoutly embraced by a servile and effeminate age; but, if superstition had not afforded a decent retreat, the same vices would have tempted the unworthy Romans to desert, from baser motives, the standard of the republic. Religious precepts are easily obeyed, which indulge and sanctify the natural inclinations of their votaries; but the pure and genuine influence of Christianity may be traced in its beneficial, though imperfect, effects on the Barbarian proselytes of the North. If the decline of the Roman empire was hastened by the conversion of Constantine, his victorious religion broke the violence of the fall, and mollified the ferocious temper of the conquerors.

This awful revolution may be usefully applied to the instruction of the present age. It is the duty of a patriot to prefer and promote the exclusive interest and glory of his native country; but a philosopher may be permitted to enlarge his views, and to consider Europe as one great republic, whose various inhabitants have attained almost the same level of politeness and cultivation. The balance of power will continue to fluctuate, and the prosperity of our own or the neighbouring kingdoms may be alternately exalted or depressed; but these partial events cannot essentially injure our general state of happiness, the system of arts, and laws, and manners, which so advantageously distinguish, above the rest of mankind, the Europeans and their colonies. The savage nations of the globe are the common enemies of civilized society; and we may inquire with anxious curiosity, whether Europe is still threatened with a repetition of those calamities which formerly oppressed the arms and institutions of Rome. Perhaps the same reflections will illustrate the fall of that mighty empire, and explain the probable causes of our actual security.

I. The Romans were ignorant of the extent of their danger, and the number of their enemies. Beyond the Rhine and Danube, the northern countries of Europe and Asia were filled with innumerable tribes of hunters and shepherds, poor, voracious, and turbulent; bold in arms, and impatient to ravish the fruits of industry. The Barbarian world was agitated by the rapid

47

impulse of war; and the peace of Gaul or Italy was shaken by the distant revolutions of China. The Huns, who fled before a victorious enemy, directed their march towards the West; and the torrent was swelled by the gradual accession of captives and allies. The flying tribes who yielded to the Huns assumed in their turn the spirit of conquest; the endless column of Barbarians pressed on the Roman empire with accumulated weight; and, if the foremost were destroyed, the vacant space was instantly replenished by new assailants. Such formidable emigrations can no longer issue from the North; and the long repose, which has been imputed to the decrease of population, is the happy consequence of the progress of arts and agriculture. Instead of some rude villages, thinly scattered among its woods and morasses, Germany now produces a list of two thousand three hundred walled towns; the Christian kingdoms of Denmark, Sweden, and Poland, have been successively established; and the Hanse merchants, with the Teutonic knights, have extended their colonies along the coast of the Baltic, as far as the Gulf of Finland. From the Gulf of Finland to the Eastern Ocean, Russia now assumes the form of a powerful and civilized empire. The plough, the loom, and the forge, are introduced on the banks of the Volga, the Oby, and the Lena; and the fiercest of the Tartar hordes have been taught to tremble and obey. The reign of independent Barbarism is now contracted to a narrow span; and the remnant of Calmucks or Uzbecks, whose forces may be almost numbered, cannot seriously excite the apprehensions of the great republic of Europe. [6] Yet this apparent security should not tempt us to forget that new enemies, and unknown dangers, may possibly arise from some obscure people, scarcely visible in the map of the world. The Arabs or Saracens, who spread their conquests from India to Spain, had languished in poverty and contempt, till Mahomet breathed into those savage bodies the soul of enthusiasm.

II.

The empire of Rome was firmly established by the singular and perfect coalition of its members. The subject nations, resigning the hope, and even the wish, of independence, embraced the character of Roman citizens; and the provinces of the West were reluctantly torn by the Barbarians from the bosom of their mother-country. [7] But this union was purchased by the loss of national freedom and military spirit; and the servile provinces, destitute of life and motion, expected their safety from the mercenary troops and governors, who were directed by the orders of a distant court. The happiness of an hundred millions depended on the personal merit of one or two men, perhaps children, whose minds were corrupted by education, luxury, and despotic power. The deepest wounds were inflicted on the empire during the minorities of the sons and grandsons of Theodosius; and, after those incapable princes seemed to attain the age of manhood, they abandoned the church to the bishops, the state to the eunuchs, and the provinces to the Barbarians. Europe is now divided into twelve powerful, though unequal, kingdoms, three respectable commonwealths, and a variety of smaller, though independent, states; the chances of royal and ministerial talents are multiplied, at least with the number of its rulers; and a Julian, or Semiramis, may reign in the North, while Arcadius and Honorius again slumber on the thrones of the South. [7a] The abuses of tyranny are restrained by the mutual influence of fear and shame; republics have acquired order and stability; monarchies have imbibed the principles of freedom, or, at least, of moderation; and some sense of honour and justice is introduced into the most defective constitutions by the general manners of the times. In peace, the progress of knowledge and industry is accelerated by the emulation of so many active rivals: in war, the European forces are exercised by temperate and undecisive contests. If a savage conqueror should issue from the deserts of Tartary, he must repeatedly vanquish the robust peasants of Russia, the numerous armies of Germany, the gallant nobles of France, and the intrepid freemen of Britain; who, perhaps, might confederate for their common defence. Should the victorious Barbarians carry slavery and desolation as far as the Atlantic Ocean, ten thousand vessels would transport beyond their pursuit the remains of civilized society; and

48

Europe would revive and flourish in the American world which is already filled with her colonies and institutions.[8]

III.

Cold, poverty, and a life of danger and fatigue, fortify the strength and courage of Barbarians. In every age they have oppressed the polite and peaceful nations of China, India, and Persia, who neglected, and still neglect, to counterbalance these natural powers by the resources of military art. The warlike states of antiquity, Greece, Macedonia, and Rome, educated a race of soldiers; exercised their bodies, disciplined their courage, multiplied their forces by regular evolutions, and converted the iron which they possessed into strong and serviceable weapons. But this superiority insensibly declined with their laws and manners; and the feeble policy of Constantine and his successors armed and instructed, for the ruin of the empire, the rude valour of the Barbarian mercenaries. The military art has been changed by the invention of gunpowder; which enables man to command the two most powerful agents of nature, air and fire. Mathematics, chymistry, mechanics, architecture, have been applied to the service of war; and the adverse parties oppose to each other the most elaborate modes of attack and of defence. Historians may indignantly observe that the preparations of a siege would found and maintain a flourishing colony;[9] yet we cannot be displeased that the subversion of a city should be a work of cost and difficulty, or that an industrious people should be protected by those arts, which survive and supply the decay of military virtue. Cannon and fortifications now form an impregnable barrier against the Tartar horse; and Europe is secure from any future irruption of Barbarians; since, before they can conquer, they must cease to be barbarous. Their gradual advances in the science of war would always be accompanied, as we may learn from the example of Russia, with a proportionable improvement in the arts of peace and civil policy; and they themselves must deserve a place among the polished nations whom they subdue. Should these speculations be found doubtful or fallacious, there still remains a more humble source of comfort and hope. The discoveries of ancient and modern navigators, and the domestic history, or tradition, of the most enlightened nations, represent the human savage, naked both in mind and body, and destitute of laws, of arts, of ideas, and almost of language.[10] From this abject condition, perhaps the primitive and universal state of man, he has gradually arisen to command the animals, to fertilise the earth, to traverse the ocean, and to measure the heavens. His progress in the improvement and exercise of his mental and corporeal faculties[11] has been irregular and various, infinitely slow in the beginning, and increasing by degrees with redoubled velocity; ages of laborious ascent have been followed by a moment of rapid downfall; and the several climates of the globe have felt the vicissitudes of light and darkness. Yet the experience of four thousand years should enlarge our hopes, and diminish our apprehensions; we cannot determine to what height the human species may aspire in their advances towards perfection; but it may safely be presumed that no people, unless the face of nature is changed, will relapse into their original barbarism. The improvements of society may be viewed under a threefold aspect. 1. The poet or philosopher illustrates his age and country by the efforts of a single mind; but these superior powers of reason or fancy are rare and spontaneous productions, and the genius of Homer, or Cicero, or Newton, would excite less admiration, if they could be created by the will of a prince or the lessons of a preceptor. 2. The benefits of law and policy, of trade and manufactures, of arts and sciences, are more solid and permanent; and many individuals may be qualified, by education and discipline, to promote, in their respective stations, the interest of the community. But this general order is the effect of skill and labour; and the complex machinery may be decayed by time or injured by violence. 3. Fortunately for mankind, the more useful, or, at least, more necessary arts can be performed without superior talents, or national subordination; without the powers of one or the union of many. Each village, each family, each individual, must always possess both ability and inclination to perpetuate the use of fire [12] and of metals; the

49

propagation and service of domestic animals; the methods of hunting and fishing; the rudiments of navigation; the imperfect cultivation of corn or other nutritive grain; and the simple practice of the mechanic trades. Private genius and public industry may be extirpated; but these hardy plants survive the tempest, and strike an everlasting root into the most unfavourable soil. The splendid days of Augustus and Trajan were eclipsed by a cloud of ignorance; and the Barbarians subverted the laws and palaces of Rome. But the scythe, the invention or emblem of Saturn,[13] still continued annually to mow the harvests of Italy: and the human feasts of the Laestrygons[14] have never been renewed on the coast of Campania. Since the first discovery of the arts, war, commerce, and religious zeal have diffused, among the savages of the Old and New World, those inestimable gifts: they have been successively propagated; they can never be lost. We may therefore acquiesce in the pleasing conclusion that every age of the world has increased, and still increases, the real wealth, the happiness, the knowledge, and perhaps the virtue, of the human race. [15]

Hindu History Hinduism has a long and complex history. It is a blend of ancient legends, beliefs and

customs which has adapted, blended with, and spawned numerous creeds and practices. Prehistoric religion: (3000-1000 BCE) The earliest evidence for elements of the Hindu faith date back as far as 3000 BCE.

Archaeological excavations in the Punjab and Indus valleys (right) have revealed the existence of urban cultures at Harappa, the prehistoric capital of the Punjab (located in modern Pakistan); and Mohenjo- daro on the banks of the River Indus. Archaeological work continues on other sites at Kalibangan, Lothal and Surkotada.

The excavations have revealed signs of early rituals and worship. • In Mohenjodaro, for example, a large bath has been found, with side rooms and statues

which could be evidence of early purification rites. • Elsewhere, phallic symbols and a large number statues of goddesses have been

discovered which could suggest the practice of early fertility rites. This early Indian culture is sometimes called the Indus Valley civilisation. Pre-classical (Vedic) (2000 BCE – 1000) Some time in the second millennium BCE the Aryan people arrived in north-west India. The Aryans (Aryan means noble) were a nomadic people who may have come to India

from the areas around southern Russia and the Baltic. They brought with them their language and their religious traditions. These both influenced

and were influenced by the religious practices of the peoples who were already living in India. Worship • The Indus valley communities used to gather at rivers for their religious rituals. • The Aryans gathered around fire for their rituals. • The Indus valley communities regarded rivers as sacred, and had both male and female

gods. • The Aryan gods represented the forces of nature; the sun, the moon, fire, storm and so

on. Over time, the different religious practices tended to blend together. Sacrifices were made to gods such as Agni, the God of Fire, and Indra, the God of storms. Writings

50

Aspects of the Aryan faith began to be written down around 800 BCE in literature known as the Vedas. These developed from their oral and poetic traditions.

You can see some of the Vedic tradition in Hindu worship today. The Caste System The Aryans also introduced the varna system (varna = estates or classes) to India, which

may have contributed to the caste system we see today. Some think that it developed from a simpler two-tier structure consisting of nobles at the

top, and everyone else below. Others say that it was established and practised by the priests who divided society into

three parts: • The priests (or Brahmins). • The warriors (the Kshatriyas). • The ordinary people. The rise of Jainism and Buddhism (800-600 BCE) Buddhism and Jainism emerged from India around 800-600 BCE, a period of great cultural, intellectual and spiritual development and both had an enormous influence on

Hinduism. Some of the previously accepted truths of the religion were beginning to be questioned and

the religious leaders were being asked to defend their views and teachings. Furthermore, the old tribal structure of society was diminishing. The result was an increasing number of breakaway sects, of which Buddhism and Jainism

were probably the most successful. Buddhism Buddha was born in the sixth century BCE as Gautama Siddhartha. He was a member of

the powerful warrior class. He renounced the pleasures and materialism of this world to search for the truth. Through

this quest he developed his basic principles for living. Buddhism became the state religion of India in the third century BCE. Buddhism had a great influence on Hinduism, from the way it used parables and stories as

a means of religious instruction, to its influence on Indian art, sculpture and education. Jainism The founder of the Jains, Mahavira (“the great hero”), was a near contemporary of the

Buddha’s and he rejected the caste system, along with the Hindu belief in the cycle of births. Mahavira was the twenty fourth of the Tirthankaras, the “Path-makers”, or great teachers

of Jainism. They developed the concept of three ways, or “jewels” – right faith, right knowledge and

right conduct. The Jains were never a numerically large group but their influence was out of all

proportion to their size and distribution. Mahatma Gandhi, whilst himself not a Jain, embraced their doctrine of non-violence to

living things. The End of the Era During the last centuries of the previous era, the Mauryan empire ruled much of India. The

most famous ruler, Asoka, although a Buddhist himself, thought that the Brahman religion was worthy of respect.

51

Brahmanism revived with the end of Mauryan rule, and at the same time devotion to individual gods, such as Vishnu and Siva, began to grow.

Some of the early Hindu images date from this period. The Start of the Current Era The first 400 years CE were a time of upheaval in the Hindu heartland. A variety of

invaders ruled the area, bringing injections of their own cultures and beliefs. Hinduism strengthened, and the cults of individual gods grew stronger. Goddesses, too,

began to attract followers. The Rise of „Hinduism” The years to 1000 CE saw Hinduism gaining strength at the expense of Buddhism. Some Hindu rulers took military action to suppress Buddhism. However it was probably

developments in Hinduism itself that helped the faith to grow. Hinduism now included not only the appeal of devotion to a personal god, but had seen the

development of its emotional side with the composition and singing of poems and songs. This made Hinduism an intelligible and satisfying road to faith to many ordinary

worshippers. The Arrival of Islam Islam arrived in the Ganges basin in the 7th century, but its influence was not really felt

until the Turks arrived in the 11th and 12th centuries CE. Islam and Hinduism were in conflict because, although the mystical traditions of both

religions had some common ground, Muslim rulers sought to conquer Hindu territories and, from the 17th century, to assert the superiority of Islam.

Islam was established – and flourished – chiefly in areas where Buddhism was in a process of slow decline, that is mainly around modern-day Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir.

Hinduism remained strongest in the south of India. Western Influence Hinduism as it is known and recognised today has been greatly affected by the influence of

western thought and practices. In the 18th and 19th centuries, missionaries from Europe attempted to convert Hindus to

Christianity with varying degrees of success. This challenged Hindu leaders to reform many practices and in some cases, revive old

practices. This period has been recognised as a period of Hindu revivalism. Rammohan Roy An early leader in this field was Rammohan Roy (1772-1833), a scholar who spoke Arabic,

Persian, Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Sanskrit alongside his native Bengali. He read most of the religious scriptures from around the world and discovered that there

was little difference between them. In 1828, he founded the Brahmo Samaj, based on the teachings of the Upanishads. Whilst he based much of his work on the teachings of the Upanishads, his social outlook

was progressive and he was keen to develop education and particularly the establishment of western sciences into Indian culture.

Rammohan Roy died in Bristol of meningitis while on a visit to Europe. There is a statue of him at College Green in Bristol.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa

52

Another school of Hinduism developed under the influence of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (1836-86) who put much greater emphasis on devotion to God. He combined the trend of popular Hinduism with its many images with a belief in a loveable Almighty God, for he could see God in many forms.

He preached without a complicated theology and without an over-reliance on the scriptures.

It was a pluralist approach to Hinduism which helped it to find its feet in the modern world. Swami Vivekananda The work of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa was continued and extended by Swami

Vivekananda (1863-1902) who, after 12 years of ascetic study and discipline, was responsible for promoting the Hindu tradition and thought in the west. He taught that the divine is in everything and promoted the Ramakrishna Mission which is well known for its social work as well as being a focus for Hindu religious thought.

International Society for Krishna Consciousness More often known as the Hare Krishnas, the movement is often recognised as the western

face of Hinduism. Its origins can be traced back to Chaitanya, a fifteenth century devotee of Krishna, who

chanted devotional songs to Krishna. His teachings were promoted in the 20th century by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, who had a

vision of taking the message of Chaitanya to the west shortly before his death in 1936. This work was taken up by Prabhupada who took that message to the United States and

eventually established bases around the world to promote those teachings.

53

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 10 10. BRIEF HISTORY OF ROMANIA

Romanian represent an unique case in Europe, because they are the single neolatin people in South-Eastern Europe, isolated from the rest of the neolatin peoples in Western, who form a block in the western part of the continent.

Like all the peoples of the world, the Romanians too are the result of a ethnic mixtion, with two predominant components: the ancestral Thracian – through the Thracians (their Geto-Dacian branch) they have a past of three thousand years – and the Roman component. To these components will be added some others too, in limited proportions, originated from the migratory peoples, among which an important role had the Slavs.

The Geto-Dacian branch of the Thracians is mentioned in archaeological and written sources, the latter from the second half of the first millennium before Christ. The Geto-Dacians were living in tribes which, in certain moments, especially before an external danger, gathered into union of tribes. The centre of their power represented Transylvania, where, in the Orastie Mountains, still exist archaeological traces of their civilization. One of their most important leaders was king Burebista who controlled a large territory which was surpassing Dacia’s borders (the ancient denomination of contemporary Romania). He was assassinated in 44 BC, almost at the same time with Julius Ceasar, just before their confrontation.

Since the 2nd century BC, Rome has begun her process of penetration in South-Eastern Europe. In the 1st century BC, it has occupied the territory of today’s Dobrogea, a province situated in South-Eastern Dacia, at the Black Sea coast. In the next century there were sharp confrontations between the Geto-Dacians and the Romans. Another powerful personnality became Dacia’s ruler: king Decebalus. He faced successively the emperors Domitian and Trajan, the latter he defeated in two wars (101 – 102 and 105 – 106). Dacia was conquered by the Romans after a grim resistance and Decebalus committed suicide. Dacia became an imperial province.

The Romans ruled over Dacia during over 170 years, a period in which – during almost five generations – it took place an intense process of romanization, similar to that which proceeded in the western parts of the empire. It took place a mixtion of the Geto-Dacian population and of the Romans. Keeping a number of words from their language (over a hundred) and some traditional customs, the inhabitants of Dacia adopted in great measure the Latin and also the way of life and the customs on the conquerors; the process of romanization had begun since the 1st century BC, before the conquest, on different levels. Between 271 and 275, under the pressure of the migratory populations, the Roman province Dacia was evacuated, the army and the administration were withdrawn.

For the last decades of the 3rd century until the end of the first millennium, the mixed Daco-Roman population has lived continuously in the Dacian space, theories about her withdrawal towards the south of the Danube being contradicted by historical and archaeological sources. The Daco-Roman population took refuge in mountains and woods when the great invasions from the East took place.

The romanized population, which maintained the links with the empire, was christianized very early and not by force. To the romanized population were added, in limited proportions, some elements from the migratory peoples and especially from the Slavs, the Daco-Roman component remaining yet dominant in the ethnic composition of the Romanians, since the last centuries of the first millennium one can speak about the existence of the Romanian people and of the Romanian language.

54

In the 9th century one can ascertain the existence of early statal Romanian formations, especially in Transylvania, whose territory was step by step occupied, by military conquest, during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium by the kingdom of Hungary. In the same time, the Hungarian kings have colonized in Transylvania – which kept a certain statute of autonomy as a “voievodat” – the Szekler and the Saxons, the Romanians – native and most numerous population -having been step by step marginalized from confessional (they were ortodox) and from socio – political point of view. The Romanians of Transylvania remained outside the system of political “nations” of the country and their orthodox confession has never been accepted among the “recept” (official) religions.

At the south and at the east of the Carpathian Mountains, Romanians succeeded in forming in the 14th century the states of Wallachia and Moldavia, which had an uninterrupted existence until their unification into the modern Romanian state. The existence of the two independent states was threatened from the end of the 14th century by the Ottoman expansion in the Balkan Peninsula. At the south of the Danube, Ottomans have submitted to their direct authority all the Christian peoples. The two Romanian states on the northern side of the river, have carried out a hard struggle of resistance and then have accomplished a historic compromise with the Ottoman Empire, to which they recognized the suzerainty. The Ottoman Empire accepted their uninterrupted existence as autonomous states ruled by a prince and by the boyarde (by the nobility); on the territory of two countries there never existed any mosk.

In the 16th century, the kingdom of Hungary was conquered by the Ottomans, who founded the Buda “pashalyk”. Transylvania became then an autonomous principality under the suzerainty of the sultan, like Moldavia and Wallachia too, but being ruled by Hungarian princes and nobles. In Transylvania, the Saxons passed to lutheranism and a part of the Hungarians and of the Szeklers to Calvinism, the Romanians who were the majority of the population remained orthodox.

Since the end of the 17th century, after the failure of Vienna’s siege by the turks and the beginning of Ottoman Empire’s decline, ceased the existence of the autonomous principality and Transylvania became a Habsburg province.

Since the second decade of the 18th century, the Ottoman Empire has established in Wallachia and Moldavia the system of the Phanariot reigns. The princes who ruled the two countries were Greeks who came especially from the constantinopolitan quarter of Phanar. The Phanariot period lasted until 1821 and represented an accentuation of Ottoman domination, but also an institutional approach of the two principalities and the beginning of some modernizing processes, some princes having been adepts of the enlightened despotism.

The XVIIIth century was also the century of the wars between the two christian empires of the region – Austria and Russia – and the ottoman Empire, which took place on the territory of the Romanian principalities. These suffered important territorial losses, the Ottoman Empire ceding the northern part of Moldavia: the Bukovina, to Austria, in 1775 and then, in 1812, to Russia, the eastern part of Moldavia: Bessarabia.

In the XVIIIth century began the process of national regeneration of the Romanians, which took place especially in Transylvania, but also in the two autonomous principalities.

Two revolutions – în 1821 and in 1848 – will symbolize the integration of the Romamians in the “century of nationalities”. The unification in a national state, the

modernization and then the independance statute represented the major goals of the Romanian national movement. The main oponent to reaching these goals was Russia, which exercised, between 1829 and 1856, an oppressive protectorate on Wallachia and Moldavia.

Consequently to the Crimean war and to the Congress of Paris (1856), the two principalities were delivered from the exclusive protectorate of Russia, being submitted to a collective guaranty of the powers.

In 1859, through the double election of the same prince – Alexandru Ioan Cuza -, Wallachia and Moldavia were unified into the modern Romanian state, Romania, which a more

55

accentuate process of modernization took place, becoming a “Piemont” of the unification of the entire Romanian nation.

In 1866, prince Cuza abdicated and in mai 1866, on the throne acceeded prince Carol de Hohenzollern – Sigmaringen. The process of modernization continued, based also on the 1866 Constitution, and in 1877, while participating to the Russian – Turkish war, Romania proclaimed its independence, which was recognized by Berlin treaty of 1878. Independent Romania was a constitutional, democratic state, with parliament, political parties, free press, but with censitary limited electoral right – until after the first world war. In 1878, Romania lost the southern part of Bedssarabia, which had been given back by the treaty of Paris, but it obtained Dobrogea, a region which the Ottomans had occupied at the beginning of the 15th century.

Romania participated in the first world war on Entente’s side. Isolated from its great allies, with the exception of Russia, submitted since 1917 to

revolutionary processes, after initial military successes, the Romanian army was constrained to withdraw to the northern part of the country and then to a separate peace, unratified by king Ferdinand 1st, successor of Carol 1st. In the period of the empires’ collapse, in the last year of the world war, through the will of the majority of the inhabitants, Bessarabia, Bukovina and Transylvania decided their unification with the kingdom of Romania. The peace conference in Paris has ratified the new territorial situation and, implicitely, the existence of Great Romania.

In the interbelic period, Romania had an important position as a middle state in Europe, with a role in the Ligue of Nations, which was presided two years successively by the Romanian statesman and diplomate Nicolae Titulescu and as leader of some regional alliances (the Little Entente and the Balkanical Entente). Its european ranging reflected in the adoption of a new Constitution in 1923, in a great agrarian reform and in the introduction of the universal vote; until 1938, the political existence of Romania was that of a democratic state.

In 1938, in Romania was inaugurated an era of dictatures: that of king Carol 2nd (1938 – 1940), that of general Ion Antonescu (1940 – 1944) and the communist one, initiated step by step, in the period which followed the putting aside of Antonescu and especially after the abdication of king Michael I (in december 1947) and which ended in december 1989. The two leaders of Romania’s communist dictature were Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej and Nicolae Ceausescu.

The process of communisation was particularly accentuated in Romania in the socio-economical, political and cultural spheres, in comparison with that which took place in other states of the region; since 1964, Romania has developed a policy of independance within the world communist movement, also towards Moscow. The relative independance in the foreign policy was doubled by an accentuation of the dictatorial policy in the internal affairs, carried out by Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu, whose regime reached aberrant and absurd forms. In december 1989, in an international favourable atmosphere, took place in Romania – where the crisis surpassed the limits of endurance – a revolutionary explosion of great proportions which put an end to the dictature. After a trial, Ceausescu and his wife were condemned to death and executed.

On the 22nd of december 1989, in Romania was instaured a pluripartidist political regime and the citizen’s liberties were restored. Since then, the country is traversing a complicated transition process, on all levels, aiming to pass to the market economy. In 1990 and 1992 there have been free elections, which assured the country’s presidency to Ion Iliescu; on the 3rd of november 1996 there have taken place new legislative and presidential elections. Romania acquired on the 1st of february the statute of special invited within the Council of Europe, and on the 28th of September 1993, the parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe voted its admission as a member with full rights. On the 1st of february 1993, Romania concluded the association agreement with the European Economical Community, and since the 1st of January 1995, it became an associated member of the European Union, since January 1994, Romania

56

declared to be favourable to the partnership for peace. Since april 1994 it solicitated to be accepted in the NATO, insisting today too to be received in the first group of partner states.

57

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 11 11. SCURTĂ ISTORIE A ROMÂNIEI

Aflată la răscrucea civilizaţiilor, dăruită cu o natură armonioasă, România a adus flinta sa specifică în concertul istoriei şi culturii universale, stând mărturie unei istorii pe cât de frământate pe atât de glorioase. Negreşit, istoria românilor este parte a istoriei europene, şi poate una dintre cele mai pline de evenimente. Aidoma celorlalte popoare romanice, poporul român a apărut în istorie în mileniul întâi al erei noastre, şi a rămas, fără întrerupere, în acelaşi spaţiu geografic, din timpuri străvechi şi până în prezent. Acesta este pământul pe care la începutul mileniului doi î.e.n., au poposit strămoşii săi, de obârşie tracică. Astăzi, românii sunt singurii urmaşi ai lumii române răsăritene, iar limba lor, împreună cu spaniola, franceza şi italiana, este una dintre principalele limbi de sorginte latină. Poporul român, prin însăşi numele său român, (provenind din latinescul romanus) venerează până în clipa de faţă Pecetea Romei, o amintire ce va dăinui prin numele adoptat de statul naţiune România. Poporul român este o insulă de romanitate într-o mare de popoare slave şi ugro-finice, într-o zonă bântuită vreme de mai bine de un mileniu de toate valurile migratoare cunoscute de Europa. De credinţa creştin-ortodoxă, românii au trăit încăpând cu Evul Mediu şi până în timpurile moderne în trei principate învecinate, de sine stătătoare: Ţara Românească, Moldova şi Transilvania. Cu toate că s-au aflat în calea marilor campanii de cucerire duse de Imperiul Otoman, Imperiul Ţarist şi Imperiul Habsburgic, românii şi-au păstrat entitatea statală, credinţa şi civilizaţia, în vreme ce regatele învecinate, cum ar fi Bizanţul, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ungaria sau Polonia, au dispărut de pe harta Europei. Ulterior, în 1859, când aceiaşi mari şi puternici vecini li s-au arătat ostili şi le-au declarat făţiş această adversitate, românii au reuşit totuşi să înfăptuiască unitatea naţională, proces definitivat în anul 1918.

La sfârşitul primului război mondial, visul nutrit de veacuri – cel al reunificării tuturor românilor în interiorul unui singur stat-naţiune – devine realitate, fiind obţinut cu preţul a mai mult de 800.000 de vieţi. Cele două decenii de cert progres economic şi reală afirmare politică şi culturală, care au urmat au fost brusc curmate îndată după izbucnirea celui de-al doilea război mondial, în anul 1940, când o treime din suprafaţa şi populaţia ţării este desprinsă de trupul ei. În 1945, după 4 ani de război şi 700.000 de vieţi pierdute, tradiţiile democratice ce au dăinuit (cu toate imperfecţiunile inerente) vreme de un secol, sunt înfrânte de trupele sovietice şi de impunerea forţată a regimului comunist.

Speranţele trezite în anii 1960–1968 de relaxarea de modelul sovietic, sunt repede infirmate prin venirea la putere a celui mai asupritor şi absurd regim totalitar – cel al dictatorului Nicolae Ceauşescu. Acestui regim i se va pune capăt prin revoluţia din decembrie 1989, care încheie golul istoric trăit de România vreme de 45 de ani, şi inaugurează o filă nouă în istoria contemporană a României. Acum sunt create condiţiile pentru desprinderea definitivă de regimul comunist şi trecerea la restaurarea societăţii democratice bazate pe multipartitism şi economie de piaţă. Desprinderea ireversibilă de trecutul totalitar a fost marcată de mai multe etape semnificative: adoptarea Constituţiei la 21 noiembrie 1991, alegeri legislative şi prezidenţiale libere (mai 1990 şi septembrie 1992).

58

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 12 12. TIMPURI STRĂVECHI

Pe teritoriul României au fost descoperite vestigii de o rară frumuseţe ale culturilor neolitice; în acest spaţiu a înflorit civilizaţia geto-dacilor, un neam aparţinând marii familii a tracilor. Geto-dacii s-au impus în faţa celorlalte neamuri în condiţii de mare însemnătate istorică (în anul 335 î. e. n. ei au luptat împotriva celebrului Alexandru cel Mare, iar în jurul anului 290 î. e. n. ei au luat ca ostatic pe succesorul acestuia, regele Lisimac). Domniile elene au influenţat pozitiv cultura şi civilizaţia geto-dacilor, care au asimilat benefic această influenţă.

Prin faptul că a reuşit să-i sperie pe geto-daci, expansiunea Imperiului Român în Peninsula Balcanică a contribuit la întărirea unităţii lor. La mijlocul secolului I al erei noastre, regele get Burebista reuşeşte să întemeieze un stat foarte puternic, unind triburile geto-dacice dintr-un spaţiu vast, care se întindea de la actualul teritoriu al Slovaciei până în Balcani; el a forţat toate oraşele pontice, de la Olbia la Apolonia din Tracia, să se supună stăpânirii sale. Lupta dintre armatele conduse de Burebista şi cele conduse de Iuliu Cezar urma să aibă loc în anul 44 î. e. n.; tocmai atunci însă împăratul roman a fost asasinat; după puţin timp, Burebista a avut aceeaşi soartă.

La începutul erei noastre, Imperiul Roman, în expansiunea sa, s-a apropiat tot mai mult de Dunăre, geto-dacii neavând altă soluţie decât să menţină relaţii cu acesta, fie cordiale, fie ostile, să asimileze elemente ale civilizaţiei romane şi de tehnica militară. Aceştia vor ţine piept românilor din punct de vedere politic şi militar vreme de aproape un secol, până în vremea împăratului roman Traian. În anul 106 e. n., după lungi şi teribile războaie, acesta reuşeşte să înfrângă rezistenţa eroică a dacilor, al căror rege, Decebal, intrat în legendă pentru curajul său, a preferat să-şi ia viaţa decât să devină prizonierul românilor. Generaţiile ce aveau să urmeze au păstrat în conştiinţa lor, ca pe o faptă glorioasă, rezistentă şi înfrângerea Daciei conduse de Decebal. Monumentele care dăinuie – Columna lui Traian, aflată la Roma, şi Tropaeum Trajani de la Adamclisi, Dobrogea – stau mărturie, prin scenele pe care le reprezintă, a curajului arătat de daci în apărarea ţinutului lor şi a munţilor lor ca o pavăză şi plini de bogăţii.

Cu toate suferinţele îndurate, includerea Daciei în Imperiul Roman a avut şi părţile ei bune: prin strădania localnicilor şi a coloniştilor romani, prin spiritul lor întreprinzător, Dacia atinge un înalt grad de dezvoltare materială şi spirituală, şi are loc un important proces de romanizare, cu amprente durabile, ce pot fi regăsite până astăzi în limba latină a poporului român, în numele său în conştiinţă şi cultură. În etnogeneza poporului român elementul etnic primordial este cel geto-dacic, peste care se suprapune elementul etnic roman.

În anul 271 e. n., datorită crizei care macină Imperiul Roman, precum şi presiunii exercitate de popoarele barbare, Î împăratul Aurelian s-a văzut nevoit sa treacă la retragerea din Dacia a trupelor sale, a administraţiei şi a unei părţi din populaţia oraşelor, deplasându-le la sud de Dunăre. Cu toate acestea, majoritatea populaţiei, alcătuită din ţărani români şi daci romanizaţi, nu şi-a părăsit pământul, rămânând strâns legată de lumea romană sud-dunăreană. Daco-romanii, în contact cu popoarele barbare, au adoptat forme de organizare impuse de nou createle condiţii istorice. Ei s-au organizat în ceea ce marele istoric roman Nicolae Iorga numea " romanii populari" sau " romanii rurali", respectiv acele teritorii unde autoritatea imperială încetase şi a căror populaţie se grupase în organisme populare. Aceasta era considerată drept romani prin locuitori, care erau conştienţi că aparţin sau că aparţinuseră Imperiului Roman.

59

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 13 13. TRAIAN

Cariera lui Traian-fiul a debutat, ca în cele mai multe cazuri, în cursul onorurilor (latineşte cursus honorum) din societatea romană, în armată. A fost mai întâi, după o evoluţie obligatorie pentru cetăţenii romani, tribun militar, adică ofiţer numit de împărat – în cazul sau de către Vespasian (69–79) – în Syria, pe când tatăl lui era numit acolo guvernator (75–76). O carieră militară iniţială de vreo zece ani, probabil parcursă între anii 71–81, i-a adus, prin meritele câştigate, după Syria, în Germania, funcţiile de cvestor şi pretor, prin anii 84–85, adică în timpul lui Domitian (81–96) din aceeaşi dinastie a Flaviilor. Tot atunci, prin anul 88, s-a remarcat cu prilejul răscoalei lui Lucius Antonius Saturninus de la Rin, împotriva căreia a adus rapid şi cu succes legiunea pe care o comandă în Hispania. Acest succes l-a determinat pe Domitian să-l sprijine pentru funcţia de consul ordinarius, obţinută de Traian în anul 91. A fost guvernator, pe rând, al provinciilor Hispania şi Germania Superior. Avea aceasta din urma funcţie când, în anul 97, era adoptat de împăratul Nerva (96-98), care s-a stins la 27 ianuarie 98. Traian, fiul său adoptiv, a fost proclamat atunci împărat. A mai rămas însă un timp pe Rin şi la Dunăre şi a sosit la Roma abia în vara anului ’99. Era ca şi cum de la bun început ar fi evitat şederea la Roma, ca o prevestire pentru abia începută domnie. Intr-adevăr, Traian (98–117) a rămas în capitala Imperiului roman doar pentru câteva etape scurte, între 99–101, apoi 102–105 şi, în fine, între 107 şi 113.

Din mai multe puncte de vedere şi începând cu acela militar, domeniu care a determinat cariera anterioară strălucită a lui Traian, noul împărat, încă tânăr la preluarea puterii, a dus o politică precumpănitor ofensivă. Aşa s-a făcut că, în ultimul an al domniei, Traian lasă urmaşilor un imperiu cu întinderea cea mai mare din istoria Romei.

Printre evenimentele foarte importante ale epocii lui Traian – aşa cum profesorul Eugen Cizek a denumit într-o carte de referinţă din 1980 răstimpul dintre 98 şi 117 al domniei împăratului – s-au aflat cele două războaie ale romanilor cu dacii şi aliaţii lor, purtate în anii 101–102 şi 105–106. Aceste războaie au modificat radical controlul român la Carpaţi şi la Dunărea de Mijloc şi de Jos, inclusiv prin apariţia unui mediu provincial roman nou, Dacia. Fusese depăşită în favoarea Imperiului chiar ofensiva mai veche a lui Domitian, ale cărei urme sunt destul de bine cunoscute pe calea surselor scrise şi arheologice.

Pentru Marte Răzbunătorul Trebuie amintită aici importanţa cel puţin la fel de mare a campaniilor orientale ale lui

Traian. O consecinţă directă a acestora a fost extinderea către răsărit a legăturilor Imperiului roman la distanţe greu de imaginat, ca în cazul Imperiului indo-scit al kusanilor. Tot aşa, crearea în anul 105 a provinciei romane Arabia dintr-o parte a fostului regat clientelar al nabateilor, a căror capitală se afla de mai multă vreme la Petra, a adus românilor controlul navigaţiei prin Marea Roşie. Acest pas foarte important s-a făcut prin golful Akkaba. Drumul prin Marea Roşie spre India era astfel deschis pentru comerţul român şi, fireşte, pentru cunoaştere şi schimb. Descoperirile arheologice de pe coastele peninsulei indiene certifică o asemenea prezenţă de pe la începutul secolului II. Ele nu se opresc aici, pentru că, relativ recent (începând cam din anii ’80 ai secolului XX), exista clar atestarea mai departe către est a unor prezenţe romane relativ contemporane cu stăpânirea lui Traian, continuând cam până în vremea Severilor. Este cazul mai puţin cunoscut al Thailandei, unde există chiar ateliere de fabricat ceramică după modele romane, dar şi importuri artizanale contemporane secolelor II-III. Chiar fără a dispune de date suficiente, se poate considera că prezenţa romană a fost chiar de atunci şi mai îndepărtată şi variată spre răsărit. Se explică astfel mai uşor descoperirile

60

romane mai târzii, datând din secolul VI, remarcate în Ceylon (azi Sri Lanka), dar şi în China, ca urmări ale unor tradiţii stabilite anterior, cel puţin graţie politicii lui Traian.

În anii care au urmat războaielor dacice, se înalţă în sudul Dobrogei, lângă fosta aşezare getică intrată într-o evoluţie urbană tipic romană, pe platoul cel mai înalt din regiune, monumentul triumfal Tropaeum Traiani de lângă satul actual Adamclisi. El era dedicat zeului " Marte Răzbunătorul " (Mars Vltor) de către însuşi împăratul Traian întru evocarea luptelor sângeroase din regiune. A fost inaugurat în anul 109. În acea vreme începuse deja construcţia Forum-ului nou al lui Traian de la Roma. Avea, în capăt de perspectivă, încă în lucru, pentru privitorul venind pe strada forurilor imperiale dinspre Colosseum, celebră de acum Columna a lui Traian, inaugurată în anul 113, la 12 mai. Soclul ei avea să adăpostească urna funerară din aur păstrând cenuşa împăratului.

61

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 14 14. DREPTCREDINCIOSUL VOIEVOD ŞTEFAN CEL MARE SFÂNT

TROPARUL – glasul I Apărător neînfricat al dreptei credinţe şi al patriei străbune ocrotitor, mare ctitor de

lăcaşuri sfinte, Ştefane Voievod, roagă-L pe Hristos, Dumnezeu, să ne izbăvească din nevoi şi din necazuri.

CONDACUL – glasul VIII Iubind pe Dumnezeu cu adevărat, binecredinciosule Voievod Ştefane, sfinte biserici şi

mănăstiri ai înălţat, pe cei săraci ai ajutat şi pe cei greşiţi i-ai îndreptat. Pentru aceste fapte ale tale, Dumnezeu ti-a dat înţelepciune şi putere ca să biruieşti pe vrăjmaşii tării şi ai credinţei creştineşti; drept aceea, pentru vredniciile tale, te instim, ca pe un evlavios biruitor.

Coborându-ne cu smerenie privirile în adâncul trecutului nostru istoric, întâlnim personalităţile – de acum legendare – ale acelor înaintaşi care au făurit această istorie prin conştiinţa naţională a permanentei şi continuităţii pe aceste meleaguri, prin limba, cultura şi tradiţiile poporului român şi prin credinţa sa ortodoxă. Sunt figurile voievozilor, viteji şi credincioşi, ale ierarhilor, învăţaţi şi blânzi, sau ale martirilor, demni până în clipa morţii, care – din splendoarea vechilor tronuri voievodale, din umbra sfintelor altare sau din locurile tristei, dar curajoasei lor mucenicii – îşi îndreaptă privirile spre noi, cei de astăzi.

Între personalităţile cele mai de seamă ale poporului român, la loc de cinste se află dreptcredinciosul voievod Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt, canonizat la Putna pe 2 Iulie 1992.

Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt (1457-1504) şi-a început domnia pe tronul Moldovei acum 535 de ani, la 14 Aprilie 1457, tara aclamându-1 Domn la locul numit “Direptate,” iar Mitropolitul Teoctist al Moldovei ungându-1 cu Sf. Mir după datină.

După ce a întărit oastea tării, care-i va fi alături în toate bătăliile pentru neatârnarea Moldovei, primul gând al noului Domn a fost acela să aibă în tara-soră, Muntenia, un Domn prieten, aliat în lupta comună anti-otomană. Dar, cu excepţia lui Vlad Ţepeş, ruda sa, ceilalţi Domni munteni contemporani – Radu cel Frumos, Laiotâ Basarab sau TTepelus – au continuat să plătească bir turcilor, ceea ce Ştefan a refuzat.

De-a lungul a 47 de ani de domnie, Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt a purtat tot atâtea lupte pentru apărarea pământului sfânt al ţării împotriva invadatorilor, creştini sau musulmani. Amintim câteva dintre acestea: în 1467 îl bate pe Matei-Corvin al Ungariei, la Baia; în 1470 pe tătari, la Lipinti; în 1471, pe Radu cel Frumos, la Soci; în 1497, pe Ioan Albert al Poloniei, la Codrii Cosminului etc. Anul 1474 marchează începutul conflictului direct cu otomanii, prin refuzul de a mai plăti haraciul, prin amestecul în treburile Munteniei, prin cucerirea Chiliei în 1465, acţiuni care determinară Poarta să trimită împotriva sa o armată uriaşă pentru acel timp, peste 120.000 oameni, conduşi de pasa Soleiman.

La Vaslui, la 10 Ianuarie 1475, oastea moldoveana, avându-1 în frunte pe Marele Ştefan, a repurtat una dintre cele mai răsunătoare victorii împotriva otomanilor.

Cronicarul polon Dlugosz nota “foarte puţini turci şi-au putut găsi mântuirea prin fugă.” Papa Sixt al IV-lea, care 1-a numit “Atletul lui Chistos,” i-a scris: “Faptele tale, săvârşite

până acum cu înţelepciune şi vitejie contra turcilor necredincioşi, duşmanii noştri, au adus atâta celebritate numelui tău încât eşti pe buzele tuturor şi eşti lăudat de către toţi.”

După victorie, Ştefan trimite monarhilor europeni o scrisoare prin care anunţa victoria şi cerea sprijin în lupta anti-otomană: “Am luat sabia în mână si, cu ajutorul

Domnului Dumnezeului nostru Atotputernic, am mers împotriva duşmanilor creştinătăţii, i-am biruit şi i-am călcat în picioare şi pe toţi i-am trecut prin ascuţitul săbiei noastre; pentru care lucru fie lăudat Domnul Dumnezeul nostru. Auzind aceasta, păgânul Împărat al turcilor îşi

62

puse în gând să se răzbune şi să vie cu puterea sa împotriva noastră şi să supună ţara noastră care este poarta creştinătăţii. Dacă, însă, această poartă, care este ţara noastră, va fi pierdută, atunci toată creştinătatea va fi în primejdie. De aceea ne rugăm de Domniile Voastre să ne trimiteţi ajutor împotriva duşmanilor creştinătăţii până mai este vreme ...”

Din nefericire, din partea monarhilor creştini ai vremii Ştefan n-a primit decât laude, dar niciodată ostaşi sau bani. Ca întotdeauna, în faţa primejdiei a fost singur, mai bine spus cu Dumnezeu şi cu ostaşii săi.

În 1476, însuşi sultanul Mahomed al II-lea, cuceritorul Constantinopolului, luă conducerea trupelor otomane şi invada Moldova. Pe Valea Albă, la Războieni, strivită literalmente de puhoiul otoman, pentru prima oară oastea moldoveană trebuie să se retragă, lăsând în urmă mulţi morţi. Turcii arseseră Suceava, dar nu putură cuceri Cetatea Sucevei, nici pe cele ale Neamţului sau Hotinului; Ştefan rămânea mai departe domnul unei ţări libere.

În 1484, Mahomed al II-lea cuceri cetăţile-cheie Chilia şi Cetatea Albă, dând Moldovei o dublă lovitură: militară, prin garnizoanele lăsate aici, şi economică, prin controlul aprovizionării. Din 1492, Moldova trebui să accepte plata haraciului pentru a păstra neatârnarea tării. Între timp s-au stricat şi relaţiile cu polonezii. Deşi aceştia îi promiseseră ajutor, în urma înţelegerii dintre Ştefan şi Regele Cazimir de la Colomeea, lesii nu s-au ţinut de cuvânt, ceea ce determină pe domnul moldovean să se împace cu Matei Corvin al Ungariei. Acesta din urmă i-a cedat lui Ştefan două cetăţi în Transilvania – aflată atunci sub suzeranitate maghiară – Ciceiul şi Cetatea de Baltă, în locul Chiliei şi Cetăţii Albe.

În 1497, Regele Ioan Albert al Poloniei, voind să pună domn în Moldova pe fratele său, porni cu oaste să elibereze cele două cetăţi, dar, în fond, dorind tara lui Ştefan. A fost înfrânt la Codrii Cosminului, moldovenii ocupând în 1502 şi Pocutia.

Marele Domn si-a încheiat glorioasa domnie la 2 Iulie 1504, rana primită la asediul Chiliei din 1462 dovedindu-se fatală, deşi medicii i-au ars-o cu fierul înroşit, într-o disperată încercare de a-l salva. Reamintesc aici finalul piesei “Apus de Soare,” de B.S. Delavrancea, în care Ştefan, interpretat magistral de G. Calboreanu, rosteşte acel cutremurător “Tatăl nostru.” Ştefan cel Mare a fost înmormântat la mănăstirea Putna, ctitoria sa, devenită gropnită domnească.

I-a urmat la tron Bogdan, fiul din căsătoria cu frumoasa Măria Voichita, fiica lui Radu cel Frumos.

Epoca lui Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt a fost “cel mai frumos timp din istoria Moldovei. Niciodată tara n-a fost mai întinsă, mai bogată şi mai respectată; niciodată faima Domnului

ei n-a străbătut atât de departe, deopotrivă în Apusul creştin ca şi în Răsăritul musulman; niciodată nu s-au ridicat atâtea lăcaşuri civile şi bisericeşti si într-o formă atât de desăvârşită” (CC. Giurăscu).

Marele ctitor Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt “a construit 44 de mănăstiri” (şi biserici – n.n.) – cum scria cronicarul Grigore Ureche, fiind întrecut, ca număr, numai de Matei Basarab, care a construit 46.

Marele Domn n-a fost numai un neînfricat conducător de oşti şi un aprig apărător al gliei străbune, un iscusit diplomat şi un bun administrator, ci şi un mare ctitor de lăcaşuri civile şi bisericeşti.

A ridicat curţi domneşti nu numai la Suceava, cetatea de scaun, ci şi la Iaşi, Piatra Neamţ, Vaslui, Cotnari, Huşi şi Bacău. A acordat o atenţie deosebită cetăţilor, punctele de apărare ale tării. Astfel, a mărit cetatea Sucevei, adăugându-i un nou rând de ziduri, a întărit Cetatea Neamţului, Cetatea Albă şi Hotinul, a ridicat construcţii noi la Chilia, Soroca, pe malul Nistrului, la Orhei, pe Răut şi la Roman.

Cele mai de seamă lăcaşuri bisericeşti construite de Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt sunt mănăstirile: Putna, începută după cucerirea Chiliei şi sfinţită în 1470 de 64 ierarhi şi preoţi în frunte cu Mitropolitul Teoctist, cum glăsuieşte “Letopiseţul de la Putna”; Voroneţul, “Capela Sixtină a Orientului,” sfinţită în 1488, cu minunate fresce exterioare; Tazlăul şi Horodnicul. Dintre biserici amintim pe cele de la Bădeuţi (1481), Pătrăuţi (1487), Sf. Ilie – Suceava (1488),

63

Sf. Ioan Botezătorul – Vaslui (1490), Sf. Nicolae Domnesc – Iaşi (1491), Sf. Gheorghe – Hârlău (1492), Adormirea

Maicii Domnului – Borzeşti (1494), Sf. Apostoli Petru şi Pavel – Huşi (1495), Sf. Nicolae – Dorohoi (1495), Sf. Mihai – Războieni (1496), Sf. Nicolae – Popăuţi (1496), Sf. Ioan Botezătorul – Piatra Neamţ (1498); Sf. Cruce – Volovăţ (1502) sau Tăierea Capului Sf. Ioan Botezătorul (1503).

Tradiţii locale îi atribuie şi construirea bisericilor din Baia, Scânteia – Iaşi, Scheia – Roman, Floreşti – Vaslui, Cotnari – Iaşi, Ştefăneşti – Iaşi, Şipote – Suceava, o biserică la mănăstirea Capriana din Basarabia, biserica Sf. Nicolae din Chihia, apoi paraclise (capele) la Neamţ, Hotin şi Cetatea Albă.

În Transilvania Ştefan a zidit biserica-mănăstire Vad, pe Someş, şi biserica din Feleac, lângă Cluj, iar în Muntenia biserica Sf. Paraschiva din Rm. Sărat. Peste hotare, a făcut numeroase danii şi zidiri la mănăstirea Zografu de la Sf. Munte Athos.

În timpul său, Biserica Moldovei s-a aflat într-un progres continuu atât datorită lui cât şi Mitropoliţilor Teoctist şi Gheorghe. Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt este întemeietorul Episcopiei Rădăuţilor, al cărui prim episcop atestat documentar este Ioanichie, în 1472, precum şi al Episcopiei Vadului, din Transilvania, în 1475.

Marele istoric Nicolae Iorga scria: “Ştefan dăduse Moldovei organizarea definitivă a ierarhiei bisericeşti, liberarea de supt controlul Patriarhiilor răsăritene ... clădiri de artă originală şi potrivită în fiecare oraş mai mare al tării şi în fiecare loc însemnat printr-o întâmplare, tristă sau glorioasă, în legătură cu desfăşurarea mai nouă a Principatului moldovenesc ...”

În epoca sa s-au pus bazele stilului “moldovenesc” în arhitectura bisericească, artiştii autohtoni îmbinând capacitatea lor creatoare, bazată pe vechile tradiţii locale, cu experienţa artistică a popoarelor învecinate; s-au scris primele letopiseţe – precum cel de la Putna sau Bistriţa – au apărat scoli de miniatură şi caligrafiere, reprezentate de Gavriil Uric sau Nicodim.

Voievodul Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt a fost un om credincios, cu mare frică de Dumnezeu, un adevărat fiu duhovnicesc al Bisericii Ortodoxe de Răsărit. Dovadă sunt frumoasele sale pisanii, precum cea de la Putna, unde citim: “În numele Tatălui al Fiului şi al Sf. Duh, Treime Sfântă, de o flintă şi nedespărţită, iată eu, robul Stăpânului meu Iisus – Hristos, Io Ştefan Voievod, din mila lui Dumnezeu, domn al ţării Moldovei.”

A purtat întotdeauna cu sine, mai ales în nesfârşitele sale lupte, un triptic (icoană în trei părţi), având în mijloc pe Mântuitorul Hristos, înconjurat de Maica Domnului şi de Sf. Ioan Botezătorul.

Când făcea acte de danii ca cea din 10 Mai 1466 de la mănăstirea Zografu, cerea să fie pomenit la sfintele slujbe cât va trăi, el şi familia sa, iar după moarte să i se facă pomenirile după rânduială, aceasta demonstrând gândirea, teologia şi concepţia sa despre viaţă şi moarte.

A avut sfătuitori nu numai ierarhi, ci şi pe Daniil Sihastru, care – cum scrie Ioan Neculce – l-a îmbărbătat după lupta de la Războieni şi l-a îndemnat să continuie lupta cu otomanii. În pisania acestei biserici, sfinţită douăzeci de ani mai târziu, în 1496, se scrie: “Fură biruiţi creştinii de către păgâni şi căzu acolo o mare mulţime de ostaşi moldoveni. Pentru aceasta a binevoit Io, Ştefan Voievod şi a zidit acest hram în numele arhistrategului Mihail pentru rugăciunea sa şi a doamnei sale, Măria, şi a fiilor săi şi pentru pomenirea şi pentru sufletul tuturor binecredinciosilor creştini care au pierit aici... Eu şi curtea mea am făcut tot ce mi-a stat prin putinţă şi s-a întâmplat ceea ce ştiţi. Pe care lucru îl socot că a fost voinţa lui Dumnezeu ca să mă pedepsească pentru păcatele mele şi lăudat să fie numele Lui” (N. Iorga). Se poate, deci, afirma că Ştefan a avut conştiinţa păcatului, inerent oricărui om virtuos şi credincios.

Ştefan cel Mare şi Sfânt s-a socotit totdeauna domn al Moldovei din “mila lui Dumnezeu”. El a înălţat biserici şi mănăstiri minunate care, ca şi tezaurele cultural-artistice pe care le adăpostesc, stau mărturie unei epoci de maximă strălucire a culturii medievale româneşti.

64

Pentru toate acest consideraţii, Biserica noastră l-a trecut în rândul sfinţilor, la 2 Iulie 1992, împreună cu Cuviosul Daniil Sihastru, sfetnicul său, şi cu Episcopul Leontie de Rădăuţi.

Pr. Prof. Dr. Cezar Vasiliu Articol preluat din volumul “Istorie şi Credinţă”,

Bucureşti, 1997.

65

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 15 15. MIHAI VITEAZUL

(1593–1601)

Mare Ban al Craiovei “domn al Ţării Româneşti şi al Ardealului şi a toată ţara Moldovei” realizatorul primei

uniri a celor trei ţări române (1600-1601) “...se zice că Românul (Mihai Viteazul – n.n.) este foarte tare şi că planurile lui cresc

potrivit cu izbânzile” Henric al IV-lea, rege al Franţei (1593-1616) “... un bărbat vestit şi ales prin naştere, cât şi prin statura lui mândră. De asemenea era

vrednic de lauda cea mai mare prin virtuţile cele mai alese, prin marea sa evlavie către Dumnezeu, prin iubirea de ţară, prin bunăvoinţa faţă de cei deopotrivă cu el, în sfârşit faţă de toţi, prin dreptate, adevăr, statornicie, mărinimie şi deprinderea altor virtuţi de acest fel. Pe lângă acestea, era drag tuturor celor buni pentru darurile înalte ale sufletului lui nobil cu adevărat, pornit chiar prin fire să săvârşească isprăvi grele, ca şi prin cuvântul său, care, de câte ori era nevoie şi chiar fără pregătire dinainte, îi ieşea din gură blând şi înţelept.” Baltazar Walter Silezianul, “Scurta şi adevărata descriere a faptelor săvârşite de Io Mihai, Domnul Ţării Româneşti”, apărută la Gorlitz, 1599

“Este un lucru demn de cea mai mare consideraţie şi de glorie eternă, întrucât ceea ce nu au putut realiza atât de mulţi împăraţi, regi şi principi a izbutit un Mihai, cel mai neînsemnat şi mai sărac dintre duci, anume să învingă oştile marelui Sultan.” Edward Barton, agent englez la Istanbul, 7 noiembrie 1595

nNu pot să nu vă comunic că din zi în zi creşte teama atât în pieptul cât şi în sufletul fiecăruia din cauza marii valori pe care o demonstrează în aceste părţi ale Europei acest nou Alexandru (cel Mare), căruia îi spune Mihai Voievodu.” Misionarul franciscan la Constantinopol Eustachio Fantena, 17 octombrie 1958

CRONOLOGIE 1558 S-a născut Mihai Viteazul, fiu al lui Pătraşcu cel Bun (domnitor al Ţării Româneşti între

anii 1554-1557). După unii istorici, s-a născut în 1557. 1588 Ocupă în ierarhia administrativ-politică a ţării dregătoria de Ban Mic sau Bănişor de

Mehedinţi. 1588 (sfârşitul anului) Ocupă dregătoria de Mare Stolnic în domnia lui Mihnea Turcitul 1591 Mare Postelnic în domnia lui Ştefan Surdul 1591 Zideşte mănăstirea “Mihai Vodă” din Bucureşti 1592 Ocupă dregătoria de Mare Aga, şi chiar Ispravnic, în locul unchiului său Iane, care locuia

la Istanbul

66

1593 Mare Ban al Craiovei în timpul domniei lui Alexandru cel Rău 1593 (septembrie) Este numit Domn al Ţării Româneşti de către Poarta Otomană. Intrarea în Bucureşti şi

ocuparea tronului au avut loc pe 11 octombrie. 1594 Mihai Viteazul aderă la “Liga Sfânta”, ce reprezenta alianţa puterilor creştine împotriva

turcilor. A încheiat şi un tratat de alianţa cu Sigismund Bathory, principele Transilvaniei, şi cu Aron Vodă (Tiranul), domnul Moldovei.

1594 (toamna) -1595 (primăvara) Campania militară împotriva turcilor. 1594 (3 noiembrie) Începe acţiunea de lichidare a creditorilor străini şi a detaşamentelor turceşti care-l

supravegheau pe domn. Concomitent a început aceeaşi acţiune la Iaşi, condusa de Aron Vodă. 1594 (noiembrie – decembrie) Restabilirea hotarului Tarii Romaneşti pe Dunăre. Ostile Tarii Romaneşti au atacat

Giurgiu, au distrus Cetatea de Floci, Hârşova şi Silistra. 1595 (ianuarie) 1 ianuarie – Au fost eliberate cetăţile Hârşova şi Brăila. 8 ianuarie – Au fost atacate localităţile de la sud de Dunăre: Silistra, Măcin, Sistov,

Nicopole, Rahova. 10 ianuarie – Au fost înfrânte oştile otomane care asediaseră Cetatea de Floci. 14-16 ianuarie – Luptele cu tătarii, care sunt înfrânţi la Putinei şi Stăneşti. La Şerpăteşti

sunt înfrânte ostile unite otomane şi tătăreşti. Mihai Viteazul a trecut Dunărea, înfrângând la Rusciuk oştirea paşalelor Hasan şi Mustafa, care primiseră ordin să-l înscăuneze pe tronul Ţării Româneşti pe Bogdan, fiul lui Iancu Vodă.

1595 (ianuarie – martie) Ostile Ţării Româneşti au atacat Silistra, Hârşova, înfrângând şi garnizoana otomană

condusă de Cară Caves din Cetatea Brăilei. Au fost atacate cetăţile Cervena, Turtucaia şi Nicopole pentru a-i împiedica pe turci să-l alunge pe Aron Tiranul de pe tronul Moldovei.

1595 (10/20 mai. Alba Iulia) Reprezentanţii lui Mihai Viteazul (boieri şi prelaţi) şi cei ai lui Sigismund Bathory încheie

un tratat de alianţă prin care Ţara Românească devine vasala Transilvaniei, iar Mihai Viteazul o va conduce în calitate de Locotenent Domnesc. Inclusiv principele Transilvaniei făgăduieşte ajutor militar împotriva turcilor.

1595 (13/23 august) Bătălia de la Călugăreni pe apa Neajlovului unde oştirea otomană, condusă de Sinan Paşa,

a fost înfrântă şi zdrobită de oştirea Română. 1595 (6 octombrie) Mihai Viteazul, cu ajutorul primit din partea lui Sigismund Bathory, al arhiducelui

Maximilian, al domnului Moldovei, Ştefan Răzvan, şi al marelui duce de Toscana, a silit oştirea otomana sa se retragă, eliberând Târgoviştea. La 12 octombrie a fost eliberat Bucureştiul, iar la 20 octombrie a fost eliberat Giurgiu. Hotarul Ţării Româneşti se stabileşte pe Dunăre, fiind eliberată şi Brăila.

1595 Polonii impun ca domn al Moldovei pe Ieremia Movilă. 1596

67

Acţiuni de luptă şi armistiţiu cu Imperiul Otoman. Oastea Ţării Româneşti a întreprins o serie de incursiuni în sudul Dunării, ducând lupte cu turcii la Vidin, Plevna şi Nicopole, la Turnu şi la Babadag. A fost nimicită garnizoana turcească din Cetatea Cladovei şi recucerită Brăila. Au fost înfrânte oştile tătăreşti ce au atacat Buzăul, Gheorghiţa şi Bucureştiul.

1596 (9/19 decembrie) Mihai Viteazul se întâlneşte cu Sigismund Bathory la Alba Iulia, propunându-i acestuia o

înţelegere hotărâtă împotriva turcilor. Sigismund Bathory oscilează între sprijinul acordat Ţării Româneşti şi încheierea păcii cu turcii.

1595 -1597 Mihai Viteazul a ridicat la Alba-Iulia, în afara zidurilor cetăţii, o nouă catedrală şi reşedinţa

mitropolitană. 1597 (ianuarie) Sultanul otoman a trimis steag de domnie lui Mihai Viteazul, recunoscând independenţa

Ţării Româneşti. 1597 (12 februarie) Solii lui Mihai Viteazul solicită împăratului Rudolf al II-lea să ia sub protecţia sa Ţara

Românească şi să li se asigure mijloace materiale pentru întreţinerea unei armate. 1598 (30 mai/9 iunie) Tratatul de la Târgovişte (Mănăstirea Dealu). Împăratul Rudolf al II-lea se angajează să-i

asigure lui Mihai Viteazul, lunar, plata a 5000 de soldaţi şi la nevoie “tunuri, praf de puşcă şi alte instrumente de război, iar Mihai Viteazul să se străduiască să îndepărteze oştile otomane de Transilvania, Ţara Românească şi din părţile Ungariei. Imperiul recunoaşte domnia lui Mihai şi a urmaşilor săi asupra întregii ţări.

1598 (2/12 iunie, Târgovişte) Încheierea Tratatului de Pace cu Gâzi Ghirai, hanul tătarilor. 1598 (septembrie) Reluarea ostilităţilor cu Imperiul Otoman. Oastea Tarii Romaneşti, organizata şi condusa

de Mihai Viteazul, a purtat o serie de lupte cu turcii în sudul Dunării la Nicopole, Vidin, Rahova, Plevna. La 6 octombrie au continuat ostilităţile cu Imperiul Otoman, după înfrângerea oştilor turceşti de la Oblucita (Isaccea).

1598 (16 octombrie) Poarta otomană este nevoită să încheie din nou pacea cu Mihai Viteazul, recunoscându-l ca

domn al Ţării Româneşti şi pe fiul său Nicolae Pătraşcu moştenitor al tronului. 1598 Cu ocazia atacului turco-tatar asupra Oradei, Mihai Viteazul, fidel alianţelor, trimite un

ajutor de 1500 de osteni comandaţi de aga Lecca. 1599 (29 martie) Sigismund Bathory, principele Transilvaniei, renunţa la tron în favoarea vărului său,

cardinalul Andrei Bathory. Noul principe era protejatul polonilor, care erau în relaţii bune cu Poarta otomană.

1599 (16/26 iunie) Mihai Viteazul încheie la Târgovişte un tratat cu trimişii lui Andrei Bathory, acceptând să

fie inclus în pacea cu otomanii, pentru a câştiga timpul necesar în vederea finalizării pregătirilor pentru a neutraliza ostilităţile Porţii.

1599 (august) Mihai Viteazul primeşte “Steagul de la Istanbul”, semn al confirmării domniei. 1599 (toamna)

68

Ieremia Movila, domnul Moldovei, îi cere lui Mihai Viteazul, printr-un trimis special, să părăsească Ţara Românească, al cărei tron urma să fie ocupat de Simion Movilă, fratele acestuia, susţinut de Polonia şi de boierii fugiţi din Ţara Românească în Moldova. Andrei Bathory trimite şi el soli la Mihai Viteazul, cerându-i să înceteze lupta împotriva turcilor şi să-i cedeze lui Ţara Românească.

1599 (18/28 octombrie) Are loc bătălia de la Selimbar. Mihai Viteazul obţine o victorie decisivă asupra cardinalului

Andrei Bathory. 1599 (1 noiembrie) Mihai Viteazul intră triumfal, cu un alai impresionant, în Alba Iulia, primind cheile cetăţii

aduse de episcopul Napragy. 1599 După unirea Transilvaniei cu Ţara Românească, Mihai îi numeşte pe Ioan de Prislop

mitropolit al românilor din Transilvania, instalându-1 în mănăstirea ridicată în 1595-1597. 1599 (noiembrie) Recunoaşterea unirii de către Poarta. Sultanul îi trimite lui Mihai Viteazul steag de domnie

ca stăpân al Transilvaniei şi lui Nicolae Pătraşcu pentru Ţara Românească. 1600 (1/11 februarie, Pilsen) Tratat de închinare şi credinţa încheiat de Mihai Viteazul cu Rudolf al II-lea, împărat al

Germaniei şi rege al Poloniei şi Ungariei. În schimbul recunoaşterii suveranităţii sale, în calitate de rege al Ungariei, Rudolf al II-lea făgăduieşte lui Mihai Viteazul ajutor şi ocrotire, domnie ereditară în linie bărbătească.

1600 (8-9 mai) Oştirea română, condusă de voievod, înfrânge oştile lui Ieremia Movilă şi cele poloneze la

Bacău. 1600 (27 mai) Mihai Viteazul emite un hrisov din Iaşi în care se intitula “Io Mihai Voievod, din mila lui

Dumnezeu, Domn al Ţării Româneşti şi al Ardealului şi al Moldovei”. 1600 (10 septembrie) Bătălia de la Miraslău. Mihai Viteazul a fost înfrânt de către oştile lui Gh. Basta, unite cu

cele ungureşti. 1600 (octombrie) Mihai Viteazul zdrobeşte oştirea otomană care trecuse Dunărea în Oltenia. 1600 (octombrie) În urma negocierilor cu Poarta, Mihai Viteazul obţine neutralitatea acesteia. 1600 (19-20 octombrie) Mihai Viteazul pierde bătălia de la Bucov (lângă Ploieşti) cu oştile poloneze, conduse de

Jan Zamoiski. 1601 (1 şi 5 martie) Mihai Viteazul s-a întâlnit cu Rudolf al II-lea la Praga. Stabilesc o acţiune conjugată

împotriva lui Sigismund Bathory, care ocupă Transilvania. 1601 (3 august) Bătălia de la Guraslau. Oştirea lui Mihai Viteazul şi cea a lui Gh. Basta îi înfrâng pe

Sigismund Bathory. 1601 (9/19 august) Mihai Viteazul a fost ucis pe Câmpia Turzii din ordinul lui Gh. Basta.

69

UNITATEA DE STUDIU 16 16. MĂNĂSTIRILE DIN MOLDOVA

Două elemente se disting în această ordonanţă – mai întâi elementul antiotoman, reprezentat de teme Sfântului luptător Gheorghe, de aceea a Vieţii Sfântului Ioan cel Nou, care, martirizat de tătari la Cetatea Alba fusese adus la Suceava de Alexandru cel Bun devenise un fel de erou naţional a luptei Împotriva necredincioşilor, şi binecunoscutul ansamblu al Acatistului Maicii Domnului. Cel de-al doilea element de “limbaj artistic” este acel al tradiţiei călugăreşti şi pustniceşti, moştenire a lui Daniil Sihastru şi legată în imaginaţia contemporanilor de primul, această parte a clerului apărând, în vremea Sfântului Ştefan şi a urmaşilor lui direcţi, drept principalii agitatori la rezistenţă împotriva dominaţiei străine. Acest element este reprezentat de temele vieţii Sfântului Nicolae, de aceea a vieţii Sfanţului Antonie, unul dintre întemeietorii călugăriei orientale, şi de aceea a vămilor văzduhului, de fapt glorificarea vieţii pure, a sihastrilor Interiorul urmează aceeaşi ordonanţă tradiţională. Fără îndoială, cercetarea erudită a distins mai multe straturi de pictură: cel original, păstra în naos, dar cu portretul votiv poate refăcut în vremea lui Sf. Ştefan cel Mare, apoi pronaosul pictat, în 1550, cu sprijinul mitropolitului Grigore Roşca. În general, ordonanţa tradiţională nu prezintă deosebite particularităţi. Doar i pridvor, ordonanţa sinaxarului, împărţită în serii continue de mici scene, are mai mult decât oriunde caracter de benzi desenate. La Voroneţ, ca şi în alte părţi, pictura are, însă, în afara calităţii de expresie a unei ideologii şi pe aceea de mărturie a unei nesecate curiozităţi şi a unei vii observaţii a realităţii înconjurătoare de către artist: costume, arme, ustensile, chiar arhitecturi şi peisaje, reproduc realitatea, viaţa pe care pictorii au cunoscut-o şi pe care au redat-o cu un pitoresc şi cu o vervă neîntrecute. Între particularităţile acestor reprezentări sunt şi unele deosebit de semnificative. Au fost încă de mult semnalate în acest sens expresiile caricaturale ale diavolilor – fapt de natură să pună problema viziunii româneşti despre infern şi în general a mitologiei eshatologice a românilor în care diavolii cei caraghioşi ai Voroneţului se înrudesc – peste veacuri, destul de apropiat – cu ceilalţi diavoli prosti, din Dănilă Prepeleac şi din Ivan Turbincă, ai lui Creangă. S-a observat mai puţin însă că inscripţiile desemnând pe păcătoşii din iad sunt în “româneşte”, iar nu în slavonă cum sunt toate celelalte.

VORONEŢ Mănăstirea Voroneţului a fost încă de la întemeiere un monument memorial şi votiv.

Aceasta explica pe de o parte caracteristicile noi ctitorii a Sfanţului Ştefan cel Mare care, spre deosebire de celelalte mănăstiri ale domnului, nu avea camera mormintelor. Explica de asemenea, atenţia de care s-a bucurat în continuare. Într-adevăr în secolul XVI – mai precis la 1547 – Mitropolitul Grigorie Roşa sfetnic a lui Petru Vodă Rareş şi văr cu domnul, construieşte pridvorul închis de la vest, pentru care adoptă o soluţie nemaiîntâlnită până la el, în cadrul căreia arhitectura este vizibil subordonată decorului pictat: peretele de vest al pridvorului este un perete plin nestrăpuns de nici o deschidere. Acest plin amplu, împreună cu suprafeţele laterale ale masivilor contraforti de colţi constituie un imens ecran unitar, pe care se desfăşoară în culorile ei strălucitoare drama binecunoscutei Judecăţi de Apoi de la Voroneţ, singura compoziţie de acest fel care se desfăşoară continuu, fără nici un fel de întrerupere sau trunchiere. Lăţimea contrafortului va fi folosită pe faţadele laterale pentru desfăşurarea unor teme cărora ctitorul picturii se pare că a dorit să le dea o importanţă deosebită: pe contrafortul de sud Viaţa Sfântului Nicolae, viaţa Sfântului Ioan cel Nou şi supradimensionat Sfântul Gheorghe omorând balaurul, iar pe cel de nord, compoziţia continuă verticală a vămilor văzduhului, teme eshatlogică apărută în mediile călugăreşti. Pe restul pereţilor exteriori, ordonanţa iconografică îşi urmează firul tradiţional: Arborele lui Ieseu, în registru vertical de

70

filosofi alăturat – pe faţada de sud, Cinurile pe abside, Acatistul Maicii Domnului, Viaţa Sfântul Antonie cel Mare, Facerea – pe faţada nord.

PUTNA Mănăstirea Putna este prima ctitorie a Sfântul Ştefan cel Mare, destinată să fie locul de

înmormântare al marelui domn şi al familiei sale. Construită între anii 1466 şi 1481, trebuia să fie şi principala instituţie eclesiastică a ţării, care să-l sprijine pe domn pe tărâm cultural şi religios în politica sa de neatârnare şi de întărire a statului. Soarta lăcaşului a fost, parcă retrăind simbolic clipele de restrişte sau de mărire ale întregii ţări, extrem de agitată. Biserica, începută în 1466, în momentul în care Sf. Ştefan ajunsese la o anumită siguranţă a domniei, a fost terminată trei ani mai târziu – în 1469, şi sfinţită abia în 1470, după ce domnul repurtase câteva victorii şi eliminase pe Petru Aron, ucigaşul tatălui său şi rivalul său la scaunul ţării. În lumina acestor evenimente, ctitoria Putnei apare ca un gest de semnificaţii – prima afirmare a domnului ca proteguitor al bisericii, iubitor de carte şi de frumos, început al unui lung şir de ctitorii menite să constituie focare de învăţătură care să temeinicească unitatea de gând şi crez a întregului popor.

Legenda spune că domnul a ales locul trăgând cu arcul. Dar dincolo de legendă se întrezăresc realităţi istorice mai substanţiale. Locul fermecător de la poalele Obcinei Mari, acolo unde se deschide Valea Putnei vărsându-se în râul Suceava, era poate un mai vechi loc de călugărie, aşa cum ar fi dovedit-o pomenirea de către Neculce a unei biserici de lemn anterioare, precum şi existenţa în apropiere a unei bisericuţe săpate în stâncă, aşa numita chilie a lui Daniil Sihastrul. Dar, în acelaşi timp, mănăstirea constituia o aşezare puternică, fortificată şi bogată, închizând una din văile prin care se putea coborî de la Pasul Prislopului în Moldova şi polarizând populaţia răsfirată din această zonă de munte, pe atunci acoperită, în mult mai mare măsură de păduri. Scurtă vreme după zidirea bisericii (în 1481), dealtfel, domnul a întărit-o cu zid de cetate cu turnuri la colţuri şi la mijlocul laturilor. Din această fortificaţie originară nu se mai păstrează decât turnul tezaurului, pe latura de apus, şi pisania turnului clopotniţei, pe sub care, poate, se şi intră în mănăstire, pe aceea de răsărit, mutată pe turnul porţii, construit mai târziu, la refacerea din jurul anului 1760. Totodată domnul da temeiuri temeinice trainice vieţii economice a mănăstirii, înzestrând-o şi dându-i nenumărate danii în pământ, păduri eleşteie, mori risipite pe tot întinsul Ţării Moldoveneşti. În anul 1503 Putna stăpânea 24 sate. Dar, în 1484, în timpul campaniei turceşti încheiată cu anexarea Chiliei şi Cetăţii Albe la Imperiul otoman, Putna arde “cu desăvârşire”, domnul o reconstruieşte, pe aceleaşi temelii, după câte se pare. Domnii care-i urmează, la rândul lor, se străduiesc să sporească şi să îmbogăţească lăcaşul prestigios. Alexandru Lăpuşneanu construieşte un turn-clopotniţă nou. La începutul veacului al XVII-lea, mănăstirea este jefuită de o ceată de hoţi care coborâse din munţi, dinspre Prundul Bârgăului. Apoi, al 1653, cazacii lui Timus Hmielnitki, veniţi să lupte pentru reîntronarea lui Vasile Lupu-Vodă, jefuirea mănăstire şi-i luară învelitoarea de plumb, din care au făcut, în cetate la Suceava, gloanţe pentru puşti. Gheorghe Ştefan-Vodă, noul domn, a refăcut în mare parte mănăstirea, poate continuând lucrări începute în scurta ultimă domnie a lui Vasile Lupu (mai-septembrie 1653)

SUCEVIŢA Fără îndoială, doamna Elisabeta Movilă a fost o femeie pe cât de frumoasă tot pe atât de

amarnică. Dar dincolo de trăsăturile chipului şi sufletului doamnei, care dealtfel este reprezentată în tabloul votiv de pe zidul de sud al naosului bisericii mănăstirii Suceviţa, dincolo chiar de persoana acesteia, din tot vârtejul de evenimente, de ambiţii şi de patimi care au învolburat începutul celui de-al XVII-lea secol în Moldova, se degaja firul roşu a ambiţiei dinastice a vechiului neam al Movileştilor, coborâtori – după legendă – din acel credincios al Sfântul Ştefan cel Mare, Aprodul Purice, şi ceva mai recent şi pe linie feminină, din despoţii sârbi din neamul Brâncovici, şi prin aceştia aliaţi cu muşatinii. Tocmai această voinţă dinastică

71

exprimă mănăstirea Suceviţa, între ai cărei ctitori apar toţi cei trei fraţi Movileşti: Ieremia, Simion – cei doi domni rivali ai lui Mihai Viteazul – şi Gheorghe, mitropolitul Ţării Româneşti. Personaje importante, puternice şi, fără îndoială, învăţate, de trei fraţi au înălţat ultima mănăstire domnească cu loc special de îngropăciune pentru familia ctitorilor, cu zid de cetate de jur împrejur şi cu dispoziţii de plan, cu soluţii constructive şi cu ordonanţe decorative care descindeau direct din programele statornicite pe vremea Sfântul Ştefan cel Mare şi Petru Rareş – adevărat “testament al artei moldoveneşti” cum a numit-o francezul Paul Henry.

MOLDOVIŢA Înălţată de Petru Rareş în 1532, şi zugrăvită în 1537, mănăstirea Moldoviţa prezintă câteva

trăsături comune cu Probota şi chiar cu Humorul. În primul rând, este o ctitorie nouă pe locul – său, mai precis, în apropierea – alteia mai vechi, ruinate; în al doilea rând, toate trei sunt o manifestare acelei slave împărăteşti de care domnului îi plăcea să fie înconjurat.

În adevăr, în apropierea actualei mănăstiri, se mai pot încă vedea ruinele aceleia pe care un act din vremea lui Alexandru cel Bun -1410 – o pomeneşte ca fiind nou zidită. Este interesant de observat că acelaşi lucru se repetă şi la Probota şi la Humor, după cum este posibil ca şi la Putna să fie existat un aşezământ mai vechi decât biserica Sfântul Ştefan cel Mare iar la Neamţ şi Bistriţa este sigur ca înainte de cele care se văd astăzi au fost înălţate alte monumente. Fără îndoială, nu era o predilecţie ciudată a domnului de a restaura sau înnoi vechile locaşuri şi nici nu trebuie pusă această acţiune exclusiv pe seama tradiţiei, conservator păstrată în cercurile bisericeşti. Bogatele danii, construcţiile importante, caracterul fastuos, rafinat al construcţiilor şi al decoraţiilor lor, toate aceste lucrări arată ca, departe de a fi doar sediul unor colectivităţi depărtate de viaţa ţării, mănăstirile acestea aveau o anumită importanţă socială, se integrau în sistemul de organizare economică, socială, politică, şi chiar militară a Moldovei. În general, aceste locaşuri sunt situate într-adevăr în zone izolate – în regiuni de munte sau în mijlocul pădurilor – de multe ori la capătul unor poteci care duc spre principalele pasuri din Carpaţii răsăriteni. Dotate cu averi importante fortificate, păstrând importante comori artistice – preţioase nu numai prin meşteşugul cu care sunt lucrate, ci şi prin materialele din care sunt făcute – având o amenajare interioară în care se poate descifra o complexitate de funcţii – căci dacă biserica rămâne cel mai important edificiu nu trebuie neglijate nici casele domneşti, nici egumeniile care îmbină sălile de adunare cu beciurile pentru rezerve, nici trapezele monu-mentale – mănăstirile aveau un rol important în ecologia ţării şi în organizarea exploatării resurselor încă virgine din zonele mai puţin locuite, şi în acelaşi timp şi funcţia militară de posturi de pază la accesele secundare care nu erau străjuite de cetăţi

DRAGOMIRNA La 12 kilometri de Suceava, aproape de pădure, spre satul Mitocul Dragomirnei a fost

ridicată Mănăstirea Dragomirna. Mitropolitul Anastasie Crimca, fiul negustorului sucevean Ioan Crimca şi al Cristinei a pus piatra de temelie a acestei mănăstiri în anul 1602. Înainte de construirea marii mănăstiri, o altă biserică mai mica fusese ridicată. Această bisericuţă poate fi văzută astăzi în curtea Mănăstirii Dragomirna, fiind de fapt prima biserică ctitorită de mitropolitul Anastasie Crimca împreună cu rudele sale – Lupu şi Simion Stroici. Pisania de la intrare arată că biserica stă sub hramul Sfinţilor Enoh, Ilie şi Ioan Botezătorul. La scurt timp după numirea sa ca Mitropolit al Moldovei, Anastasie Crimca începe să construiască Mănăstirea Dragomirna. Lucrările au fost terminate în 1609, iar mănăstirea a fost sfinţită la sărbătoarea Pogorârea Sfântul Duh. Arhitectura moldovenească a acelui timp va cunoaşte multiple inovaţii prin această construcţie cu proporţii şi elemente inovative. Cu o structura îngustă şi alungită, având o absidă poligonală în partea de vest, ansamblul impresionează prin alura sa monumentală. Biserica ni se dezvăluie ca un edificiu deosebit, unde cadrele ferestrelor cu elementele de factură gotică se armonizează perfect cu bogatele decoraţiuni ale turlei ce sunt de influenţă pură românească. Odată păşind în biserică, nu putem să nu remarcăm înălţarea

72

graduală a camerelor, începând cu pridvorul şi mergând spre altar, bogata reţea de nervuri aliniate aproape peste tot, colorate în roşu, albastru şi auriu, şi încărcarea lor cu linii. Sursă de inspiraţie a fost probabil desenul din vechile manuscrise bisericeşti. Şi, pentru ca totul să fie perfect, mai sunt amplasate din loc în loc în câteva sculpturi. Pereţii şi bolţile naosului, precum şi cei ai altarului sunt acoperiţi cu picturi în frescă de o mare valoare plastică. Fără îndoială că la şcoala de pictură tradiţională moldovenească s-au format cei trei pictori ai Dragomirnei.

HUMOR Frumoasa mănăstire din marginea oraşului Gura Humorului are o poveste lunga şi

complicata. Ca şi Moldoviţa şi Probota, începuturile ei urcă în veac până în vremea domniei lui Alexandru cel Bun. În acea vreme oraşul învecinat nu există încă, iar mănăstirea se ascundea între codrii unei văi de râu. Ruinele ei se mai pot vedea şi astăzi pe drumul care duce din oraş la mănăstire, mai aproape de oraş decât actuala biserică. Aceasta prima mănăstire a fost înălţată de către marele vornic Oana, încă de la începutul sec. XV; mănăstirea se ruinase şi se pustiise către începutul sec. XVI, probabil nu fără legătura cu şirul de războaie purtate de Sfântul Ştefan cel Mare. În vremea lui Petru Rareş, Humorul este cuprins în campania de restaurări iniţiată de domn lucrare săvârşită de un mare boier, logofătul Toader Bubuioc. Pisania ne înfăţişează înălţarea mănăstirii că datorită exclusiv lui Jupan Teodor Bubuioc şi soţiei sale Anastasia, dar cu ajutorul şi bunăvoinţa domnului Petru voievod (Rareş). Mai mult decât atât, tabloul votiv îi înfăţişează pe acesta din urmă, în picioare, după cum se cuvenea, condus de Fecioara Maria, oferind biserica lui Hristos, în timp ce ctitorul real este înfăţişat doar în camera mormintelor, în genunchi, oferind la rândul său biserica Mântuitorului. Mormântul însuşi al ctitorului se află în camera mormintelor, încăpere pe care n-o aflăm de obicei decât la mănăstirile ctitorii domneşti şi folosite numai de familiile domnitoare. Biserica deşi se conformează planului obişnuit în vremea lui Petru Rareş nu are turlă, particularitate caracteristică pentru bisericile paracliselor bisericeşti, sau servind drept lăcaşuri de cult unor comunităţi – oraşe sau sate – în timp ce mănăstirile domneşti şi bisericile domneşti au totdeauna o turlă pe naos.

73

CHAPTER II

GRAMMAR EXPLANATIONS AND EXERCISES

Singular Plural I I we II you you III he they she it (Neutru) Pronumele “I” se scrie întotdeauna cu majuscule. Substantivul (la singular) este întotdeauna precedat de un determinant. Determinanţii

substantivului – articolul, adjectivul posesiv şi adjectivul demonstrativ – nu pot fi folosiţi simultan şi nu se modifică după genul substantivului pe care-l determină.

Articolul nehotărât (The Indefinite Article) se întrebuinţează numai la singular: 1) “a” precede substantive care încep cu consoana sau semivocala; 2) “an” precede substantive care încep cu vocala. Example: 1) He is ateacher. She is a woman. 2) I’m an economist. You’re an engineer. Articolul hotărât (The Definite Article) are aceeaşi formă indiferent de cazul, genul şi

numărul substantivului pe care îl determină (the woman, the books, the man etc). Se pronunţă diferit în funcţie de sunetul cu care începe cuvântul care urmează, consoană sau vocală.

Se articulează cu articol hotărât substantivele precedate de prepoziţie. Example: on the table (pe masă) in the classroom (în clasă) Adjectivul (The Adjective) Adjectivul calificativ se aşază întotdeauna după articol, înaintea substantivului

determinant. a good girl Nu se modifică în funcţie de genul, cazul şi numărul substantivului determinat. a good girl good books Adjectivele care exprimă naţionalitatea se scriu cu majusculă a Romanian citizen Exerciţii: 1. Add a or an (Adăugaţi a sau an): ... doctor; ... old factory; ... young lady; ... economist; ... good economist; ... typist; ...

student; ... old man; ... architect; ... bird; ... office; ... boy.

74

2. Fill in the blanks with the verbs “to be” (Completati spatiul liber cu verbul “a fi”): 1. It... a book; 2. John and Jack ... students. 3. I ... a teacher. 4. She ... a housewife. 5. They ... engineers. 6. Mr. Black ... an architect. 7. We ... economists. 8. Mrs. Smith ... an economist 9. You ... office-workers. 3. Answer to the following questions, according to the model (Răspundeţi la întrebări, conform modelului): Model: Is he an economist or a teacher? He is an economist, he isn’t teacher. 1. Is she typist or a housewife? 2. Am I an engineer or an architect? 3. Is he a schoolboy or a student? 4. Are we economists or doctors? 5. Are you an office-worker or a schoolgirl? 6. Is he tall or short? 7. Is she fat or thin? 8. Are you a Romanian citizen, or an Englishman? 9. Are you students or teachers? 4. Write questions to the following sentences (Puneţi întrebări pentru propoziţiile

următoare): 1. She is a doctor. 2. We are economists. 3. They are engineers. 4. He is an architect. 5. Bob is a schoolboy. 6. Miss Brown is a typist. 7. I am an economist. 8. You are a teacher. 5. Translate into English: 1. Este el un economist bun? 2. Ce este ea? 3. Cine eşti tu? 4. Este el elev sau student? 5. El nu este englez, este român. 6. Cum arată ea? 7. Profesoara de engleză este înaltă şi slabă. 8. Tu nu eşti funcţionar bun. 9. Ce mai face el? 10. E1 este bine, dar tu?

PRONUMELE ŞI ADJECTIVELE DEMONSTRATIVE

75

THIS / THAT (singular) şi THESE / THOSE (plural) pot fi adjective sau pronume demonstrative. This man is tall, (adj.) These are windows, (pronume) singular THIS – HERE singular THAT – THERE plural THESE-HERE plural THOSE-THERE

PRONUMELE ŞI ADJECTIVELE POSESIVE

Pronouns Adjectives singular I mine I my book (books) II yours II your book (books) III his III his book (books) hers her book (books) its its colour (colours) plural I ours our book (books) II yours your book (books) III theirs their book (books)

PLURALUL SUBSTANTIVELOR

Pluralul regulat al substantivelor se formează prin adăugarea terminaţiei –s la singular. Substantivele terminate în ch, sh, s, ss, x, zz primesc terminaţia es care se pronunţă [iz]. Example: bus- buses, class – classes, brush – brushes Când consoana s este urmată de vocala e se adaugă doar terminaţia s. Example: exercise –

exercises y final la singular, precedat de consoană se transforma în i. Exemple: lady – ladies, story – stories. y final la singular, precedat de vocală nu se schimbă înaintea terminaţiei de plural s. Example: boy – boys; toy – toys Substantive cu plural neregulat: Singular Plural Man (bărbat) Men (bărbaţi) Woman (femeie) Women (femei) Child (copil) Children (copii) Foot (picior) Feet (picioare) Tooth (dinte) Teeth (dinţi) Goose (gâscă) Geese (gâşte) Die (zar) Dice (zaruri) Mouse (şoarece) Mice (şoareci)

INDICATIVUL PREZENT AL VERBULUI

“TO HAVE” Afirmativ Negativ I have I have not (I haven’t) You have You have not (you haven’t) He has He has not (he hasn’t) She has She has not (she hasn’t) It has It has not (it hasn’t)

76

We have We have not (we haven’t) You have You have not (you haven’t) They have They have not (they haven’t) Interogativ (negativ) Have I (not)? Haven’t I? Have you (not)? Haven’t you? Has he (not)? Hasn’t he? Has she (not)? Hasn’t she? Has it (not)? Hasn’t it? Have we (not)? Haven’t we? Have you (not)? Haven’t you? Have they (not)? Haven’t they? Exerciţii 1) Complete the following sentences according to the model below: I have a house. It’s my house. It’s mine She has a dress ............................................................... We have a new teacher .................................................. They have a big house ................................................... He has a red bike............................................................ You have a ten pencil..................................................... I have two friends .......................................................... This dog has a house...................................................... They have new toys ....................................................... 2) Fill in the blanks with the verb „to have”: This room .......... four walls. She .....................a smart dress on....................... you a new

car? All the students good English-Romanian dictionaries. .............he a big and white house? They...........(neg-) English classes today. You.........(neg-) six chairs in your room. She (neg.) an exercise-book on her table............ this dog a long tail?

3) Completaţi spaţiile libere cu adjectivul posesiv corespunzător: We have a lot of books on ..............desks. They are ............... books. The typist has a new

typewriter ................. ............................typewriter is on ............... desk. Those students have good English-Romanian dictionaries .... dictionaries are on the shelves. Jack has a blue pencil.......... pencil is in pencil-box. Those ladies have new dresses on ....................................................................................dresses are very smart. That room has three windows are opened.

4) Treceţi următoarele propoziţii la plural:

My book is on your desk. Isn’t her pencil-box in her school Is that her room? bag? His wall is white. That man hasn’t a new wrist Your dress is very nice. watch. I have a nice room. Haven’t I many books and He has a red pencil. dictionaries? Has my classroom three windows? Has the typist a new typewriter?

5) Traduceţi în limba engleză:

77

Această carte nouă este a ei. Unde este camera lor? A mea este aici. Poveştile lui sunt interesante. Aceşti bărbaţi sunt înalţi şi slabi. Acestea sunt maşinile lor. El are doi copii drăguţi. Ce se află în cutia aceea? Penarele noastre sunt acolo în camera lui.

6) Alcătuiţi propoziţii cu următoarele expresii: tell the time; a quarter to; in the middle; quite right; all over the world; a quarter of an hour

slow; ten minutes fast; for example.

THE SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE Arată o acţiune prezentă generală sau repetată, o idee de viitor, este folosit în indicaţii

scenice şi mai rar este folosit în prezentul istoric: Afirmativ Negativ I work I don’t work (do not work) You work You don’t work He/she/it works He/she/it doesn’t work We work We don’t work They work They don’t work Interogativ Do I work? Do you work? Does he/she/it work? Do we work? Do they work? La afirmativ terminaţia s la persoana a III-a singular se pronunţă diferit: looks [s]. listents

[z]. Verbele terminate la infinitiv in sh, ch, x, ss, o, primesc terminaţia es la persoana a III-a

singular. I go – he goes I watch TV – he watches TV

PRONUME REFLEXIVE

Singular Plural Myself- însumi, însămi Ourselves – înşine Yourself- însuţi, însăţi Yourselves – înşivă Him / her / it self- însuşi Themselves – înşişi,

însele

GENITIVUL SAXON (SINTETIC) ‘s Ordinea cuvintelor: substantivul care denumeşte posesorul (oameni, animale, ţări etc.) -’s

(pentru singular) sau apostrof -’ pentru plural, plus substantivul care denumeşte obiectul posedat.

the student’s book the students’ books Mary’s dog substantivul propriu nu

primeşte articol hotărât Exerciţii:

78

1) Put reflexive pronouns into the blank spaces: Tom shaves ................in the morning. You enjoy ........... ................. whenever you go to see

them. These dogs ............... climbing over the fence. Does she make the cakes by ? We learn French all by.................. I must stick............... the stamp on the letter. 2) Answer to the following questions: What time do you wake up every day? When does torn get out of bed everyday? Do you

brush your teeth every evening? Does Tom have breakfast at home, or in your town? Where do you have your breakfast? What time do you get to your job everyday? Are you off (free) in weekend? What does Tom do when the program is over? What do you do on Sundays?

3) Put the following sentences into a third person a) singular b)negative c)interrogative I like modern music very much. I go to work from Monday to Saturday. You comb your

hair every morning. They leave the office late in the morning. We come home at 7 p.m. I always kiss my baby good night. My students speak French very well. Her friends do their morning exercise only in weekend. I try to do the cleaning when I have time. They drink much coffee for their age.

4) .Write questions to the following statements: We want to travel to England every year. Where............................................................................ She likes my new dress. What.............................................................................. I don’t feel quite well today. How............................................................................... The Browns usually spend a lot of money on foreign books. What.............................................................................. Who............................................................................... It looks awful. How............................................................................... The chalet is about half a mile from here. How............................................................................... This house is too expensive for us. Why............................................................................... Brad Pitt plays in this film. Who............................................................................... More than twenty families live in this house. How many..................................................................... He resembles her father. Whom............................................................................ 5) Translate into English: Ce faci tu în fiecare zi? La ce oră se trezeşte sora ta dimineaţa? Fratele doamnei Brown are

o maşină nouă. Nu ştiu răspunsul la întrebare. Noi nu mâncăm de obicei dimineaţa. De unde vine el la ora 8 în fiecare seară? Unde muncesc părinţii lui John?

THE PRESENT CONTINUOUS TENSE

79

Prezentul continuu exprimă o acţiune desfăşurată acum (NOW), în momentul vorbirii; se foloseşte şi pentru a arăta o acţiune care va avea loc în viitorul apropiat (plans for the near future). Se formează astfel:

TO BE + Vb. – ing Present Indicative Afirmativ – am / are / is + vb. – ing Interogativ – am / are / is + subiect + vb. – ing? Negativ – subiect + am / are / is + not + vb. – ing Observaţii: a) Când un verb se termină într-un singur e (mut) acesta cade înaintea sufixului ing. Example: to write – I’m writing a letter. b) “y” final nu cade inaintea sufixului ing.

Ex: to play – they’re playing cards. c) Verbele monosilabice care se termină într-o consoană precedată de o vocală, dublează

consoana înaintea terminaţiei ing. Example: to shut – Who is shutting the door now? d) Verbe care nu se folosesc în aspectul continuu (Verbs which are not used in Continuos

Aspect): Mental activity – to believe; to understand; to mind (a obiecta); to know; to recognize; to

think that (a crede) Liking or disliking – to like, to dislike, to love, to hate Inert perceptions – to see, to hear, to feel, to taste, to smell Various verbs: to possess, to own, to have, to belong, to contain, to consist, to seem, to

sound, to result, to suit, to want, to mean, to agree with, to prefer. Exercises: 1) Put the verbs in brackets into Present Simple or Present Continuous: The last train

(leave) the station at 11:30. What you (do) on weekends? On weekends we (go) on trips. Are you (shut) or (open) the window? Pardon me, madam, but I think you (stand) on my feet. This music (sound) good to me. Now, you (believe) in God or not? What she (want) now? What they (talk) about? They (talk) for hours everytime they (meet) each other. Why you (drive) so fast ?

2) Ask questions to the underlined parts of the following sentences: This man is singing pop music. I’m going out with my girlfriend tonight. She’s wearing

the new fur coat tonight. That woman is at you. They are talking about film stars. He’s going to the office by tube today. Tom is drinking the sixth glass of wine this evening. I’m looking for my shoes. Nobody is watching that soap-opera now. She is feeling fine now.

3) Translate into English: Ce încerci să faci acolo? Încerc să-mi repar singur maşina. De ce râzi de mine? Crezi că nu pot să rezolv problema singură? Acum, ce ştii despre el? Lucrează încă la agenţia de voiaj sau sunt şomeri? Mergi prea repede, nu pot să te ajung din urmă. Întotdeauna plânge când îi spun povestea asta. Nu mai suport. Auzi zgomotul acela la etaj? Cineva ascultă iar muzica aceea îngrozitoare. Din păcate nivelul de trai este încă în scădere. Bărbatul care coboară acum din tren este fratele mamei mele. Pisica ta prinde vreodată şoareci sau e leneşă? Sunt prea obosit şi acum nu înţeleg nimic din tot ce-mi spui.

80

VERBELE MODALE

Verbele modale sunt verbe speciale, cu următoarele caracteristici: 1) nu au terminaţia s la persoana a III-a singular, prezent simplu; 2) nu au forma de infinitiv, deci nu sunt precedate de particula TO; 3) nu primesc terminaţia ing; 4) formele interogative şi negative se construiesc fără verbul auxiliar TO DO; 5) verbul care urmează după un verb modal se pune la infinitivul scurt (fără TO); excepţie

OUGHT TO; 6) nu au toate timpurile şi modurile şi de aceea au echivalenţi:

PRESENT PAST TENSE EQUIVALENT MEANING CONDITIONAL Can Could To be able to A putea; a şti

Must - To have to A trebui

May Might To be allowed to A putea; a avea

To be permitted to voie; To be possible to A se putea Shall Should - A trebui

Will Would - A vrea

Ought to - - A trebui; a se

cuveni să Need Needed - A fi nevoie

Dare Dared - A îndrăzni 1) Fill in the blanks with CAN, MAY, MUST according to the meaning: ....... help you?.................. help me? ................. (neg) open the window, it’s too cold. He

.............. walk at his age. It’s not raining heavily now. It clear up. You ............ write your homework at once ................... have a glass of water please? they translate the report into English? He ............................ (neg-) understand a word I’m saying. We (neg-) smoke in the children’s room ....................... they be at school at 7 a.m. everyday? We take a taxi to the hotel. How ............................... ............ you contradict your parents?

2) Translate into English: Ştii să înnoţi? Astăzi nu pot veni cu tine, părinţii nu mă lasă. Trebuie să citesc tot romanul

în două zile? Cine poate să mă ajute să-mi termin treaba? Trebuie să plec imediat şi nu pot să ies din birou, e încuiat. Să ne luăm umbrela, poate să plouă. Vorbeşte mai tare, nu te aud. Poate rămâne şi el aici? Nu, nu are voie, e prea mic. Pot să ies la plimbare dacă iese soarele? Poţi să-mi spui unde mă aflu?

PRONUMELE ŞI ADJECTIVELE NEHOTARATE INDEFINITE PRONOUNS AND

ADJECTIVES Majoritatea pronumelor nehotărâte pot fi folosite şi ca adjective nehotărâte: - all, each, either, neither, both, some, any every, no (şi compuşii lor); much, many, little,

few, other, another, one, several. Example: All (pron.) can understand the lesson.

81

All (toti) (adj.) the pupils can understand the lesson. - each, every – fiecare - each – fiecare luat în parte (individual) - every – fiecare (în totalitate) Compuşii: everyone, everybody, everything - both – amândoi, amândouă Example: Both my friends are coming here. - either – ambii, ambele; oricare din doi Example: You may have either room. - neither – nici unul, nici una (din doi sau două) + vb. la afirmativ Example: Neither of my cousins are here. - one – un, o Example: One day we’ll be friends - other – alt, alta, alte Example: Other people may disagree with you. - another – un altul, o alta, încă Example: I have another idea. - the other – celălalt, cealaltă, ceilalţi, celelalte Example: Take the other glass, it’s yours. Pron.: The other one is really good. - much – mult, multă Example: She always puts much sugar in tea. - many – mulţi, multe Example: Many little girls like dolls. - (a) little – puţin, puţine Example: We can speak a little Spanish. - (a) few – câţiva, câteva, puţini, puţine Example: A few boys are playing cards. - several – câţiva, câteva - some – ceva, nişte, unii, unele, câteva Example: Some think that she’s right. - any – oricare, orice, ceva, nişte, vreun, vreo (în propoziţii afirmative) - nici unul, nici o (cu verbul la negativ) Example: a) Do you want any fruit? b) I can’t see any cop in the street. - no – nici unul, nici o, în propoziţii negative cu verb la afirmativ. Example: I have no idea what do to next. Compuşii: somebody, someone, something,

anybody, anyone, anything, nobody, none, nothing Exerciţii: 1) Copy the following sentences choosing the correct adjective: There is (little, few) water in the bucket. There are (much, many) wooded hills in our

country. We have received (much, many) valuable information. They made (little, few) mistakes in the test paper. How (much, many) fruit trees are there in the orchard ? (much, many) airplanes passes over here. There is (little, few) milk in the bottle.

2) Supply some or any: Wasn’t there........... telephone in the house? May I give you ............................ more ham?

“Give me .............. cold milk to drink”, said Mary. He may turn up............ time. The driver can stop the engine at................... moment he pleases. ........... ....................................... people are

82

very interesting, to talk to; others are boring. Is there................... reason for his refusal? You’ll have to do it....................way.

3) Fill in “every, each” as required: ............customer makes payment over the counter, or at the cash desk if this cash system is

employed. She does her shopping her........week. I see her............ Friday afternoon ...............person knows how to buy in a self-service shop. They were a lot of bottles and jars on ............. side of the shop-assistant.............of these housewives got a chit for presentation at the cash desk.........of them gets a string basket on entering the shop........ of you must visit the new supermarket.

4) Translate into English: Nici una dintre cele două soluţii nu este bună. Amândoi sunt de acord cu tine. Vreau să

cumpăr ambele bluze, dacă nu este vreo problemă. Nici un om nu poate realiza acest lucru singur. Nu citeşte nici o carte acum, se uită la televizor. Niciodată nu se supără unul pe altul pentru că se iubesc. Mary are prea puţin timp liber. Nu se ajută unul pe altul deşi sunt fraţi. N-am nimic împotriva lui, dar orice spune mă plictiseşte.

THE PRESENT PERFECT (COMMON ASPECT)

The Present Perfect Tense este întrebuinţat pentru a arăta o acţiune care s-a desfăşurat

într-un trecut apropiat, este nedefinită în timp şi are legătură cu prezentul, sau se desfăşoară într-un trecut apropiat, este nedefinită în timp şi are legătură cu prezentul, sau se desfăşoară şi în prezent. Se traduce de cele mai multe ori prin perfectul compus, dar şi prin prezent.

Se formează: Afirrnativ: have / has + Vb. – ed / III Interogativ: have / has + subiect + Vb. – ed / III Negativ: subiect + have / has + not + Vb. – ed / III They have just arrived. – Tocmai au sosit. Where have you been ? – Unde ai fost? How long have you known him? – De cât timp îl cunoşti? Datorită faptului că acţiunea exprimată de acest timp este nedefinită, el poate fi însoţit, şi

de cele mai multe ori este, de unul din următoarele adverbe (sau locuţiuni adverbiale) de timp nedefinit şi frecvenţă:

- se pun în faţa verbului: just (abia); ever (vreodată); never (niciodată); often (adesea); seldom (rareori); always (întotdeauna); sometimes (cândva, uneori); already (deja); rarely (rareori); frequently (frecvent); occasionally (din când în când); generally (în general).

- se pun la sfârşitul propoziţiei: today (astăzi); this week/month/summer ...; lately; recently; of late (recent, de curând, în ultima vreme); yet (încă)

The play has just begun. He has never been so angry before. I haven’t eaten anything today. SINCE, FOR cer timpul Present Perfect in propozitiile din

fata lor (deci nu in cele introduse de ele) atunci cand actiunea exprimata de propozitia respectiva se continua pana in prezent.

Since – de, din, de la, de cand (arată momentul începerii acţiunii) For – timp de (arată durata acţiunii)

She hasn’t visited this town since she was a child. He has worked in this office since he graduated. We haven’t been at the seaside since September. Mary and Tom have begun engaged for a month/ a long time...

83

Exercises: 1) Put the verbs in parenthesis into the Present Perfect Tense: You ever (eat) a snake? Where you (be)? The film just (begin). Your girlfriend (phone)

yet? It (not rain) here for three years. Her dog never (bite) anyone. You (read) any novels recently. He (hurt) his leg. We (miss) the last train. Your baby brother just (tear) your newspaper. I (borrow) my brother’s car.

2) Ask questions about the underlined parts of the following sentences: I’ve never driven a

car at high speed. Mary has written a nice poem. The first act has just finished. I haven’t had my breakfast yet. They have accused him of perjury. We’ve saved little money this month. The boys have broken the window. I have dedicated this song to you. They’ve lived here all their lives.

3) Give the Present Perfect 3-rd person singular of the following verbs: To give, to throw away, to look, to queue up, to carry, to wait, to be , to leave, can, must, to

see, to read, to understand, to hurry, to spend. 4) Translate into English: Trenul a plecat deja din gară. Ei încă nu s-au urcat în tren. Fiul tău a mai călătorit vreodată

cu trenul? Nu, are doar doi ani. Am citit ziarul deja. Şi-a rezervat bilete astăzi? Nu l-am mai văzut de atunci. Unde ai fost toată dimineaţa? De când e fratele lui bolnav? Tocmai am comandat cafea şi îngheţată. Până acum n-am mai mers la mare cu trenul, dar tu? Eu am mers numai cu maşina mea în fiecare an. Unde ai de gând să pleci acum, că ai câştigat concursul?

THE PRESENT PERFECT (CONTINUOUS ASPECT)

The Present Perfect Continuous Tense exprimă o acţiune care a început de curând şi se

desfăşoară în mod continuu şi neîntrerupt până în prezent. Se traduce prin timpul prezent. Se formează: Afirmativ: have / has + been + Vb. – ing Interogativ: have / has + subiect +

been + Vb. – ing Negativ: subiect + have / has + not + been + Vb. – ing We have been listening to music for two hours now. What have they been doing for the last three hours? Mary hasn’t been learning since you left. Exercises: 1) Answer the following questions: Since when have you been living in Bucharest? How long have you been learning English? Have you been writing for the last ten minutes? What have you been thinking of for the last quarter of an hour? 2) Put the verbs in the parentheses into the Present Perfect Continuous or Simple: Paul (wait) for Linda for half an hour. Where is my book? I (look) for it all day. Mary

(never, be) so late before. How long they (live) here? Tom (leave) yet? Mr. Smith (show) us his new car today. My calculator is out of order. You (use) it? We (pay) our rent on time up to now. She’s very tired. She (drive) too long. He (take) English lessons since October. They (work) on computer for three hours now.

3) Translate into English: Sunt în aceeaşi staţiune de patru zile şi nu i-am văzut. Unde au fost? Sunt la nişte prieteni

zilele astea şi pe urmă vor veni la plajă cu noi. De când ştii să înoţi? Iau lecţii de înot de un an

84

dar tot nu ştiu să înot bine. Lor le e frică de apa din copilărie. Fumezi de mult? Fumez de zece ani şi nu pot să mă las. L-am ajutat deja destul şi nu mi-a mulţumit încă.

THE DEGREE OF COMPARISON

(Gradele de comparaţie ale adjectivelor) Gradele de comparaţie au numai adjectivele calificative care se împart în trei categorii: 1) adjective scurte (monosilabice şi bisilabice) 2) adjective lungi 3) adjective neregulate I. Comparaţia adjectivelor scurte: a) gradul pozitiv – clever b) gradul comparativ: – de inferioritate: not so/ as clever as – de egalitate: as clever as – de superioritate: clever than c) gradul superlativ – relativ – the cleverest – very clever Reguli de ortografie la adăugarea terminaţiilor er şi est – adjectivele monosilabice terminate într-o singură consoană precedată de o singură vocală

dublează consoana finală: hot – hotter – the hottest – adjectivele terminate în e mut îl pierd: nice – nicer – the nicest – y final precedat de consoană se transformă în i: happy – happier -the happiest Excepţii: shy, sly, dry, wry II. Comparaţia adjectivelor lungi: interesting – not so interesting – as interesting as – more interesting than -the most

interesting – very interesting III. Comparaţia adjectivelor neregulate (cele care nu respectă regula de formare a

comparativului de superioritate şi superlativului relativ):

POZITIV COMPARATIV SUPERLATIV Good Well Better The best

Bad – rău (adj. şi adv.) Worse The worst

III – bolnav (după to be, to look, to feel) Little Less Lesser The least

Few Less Fewer The fewest

Much Many More The most

Old Older The oldest

Elder The eldest (pt. Membrii aceleiaşi familii) Far Farther Further The farthest, farthermost

85

(spaţiu) The furthest, furthermost (timp) Near Nearer The nearest The next

Fore Former The foremost The first

Late Later Latter The latest (cel mai recent) The last (ultimul, după

care nu mai urmează nimic) Hind Hinder The hindmost, hindermost

Exercises: 1) Give the comparative and superlative of the following: beautiful, comfortable, old, bright, sunny, friendly, dry, difficult, heavy, careful, quiet,

happy, sad, lucky 2) Put all the adjectives in parentheses in the right form: My chess is not the (expensive) in this shop. Mary is (old) than Kate but (young) than

Tom. Summer is (warm) than spring. Who is your (good) friend? I think he’s (bad) dancer in the world. She is a (bad) driver than I am. Summer is the (warm) of the four seasons. This is the (happy) day of my life. This movie is (moving) than “Casablanca”. Lucy is the (short) of the three sisters.

3) Make short dialogues on weather. Use words from the texts. 4) Translate into English: E mai bine să stăm în casă dacă plouă. După ploaie, aerul e foarte proaspăt. El e mai lenes

decât tine, dar mai isteţ. Vara asta este mai lungă şi mai călduroasă decât anul trecut. Cred că iarna, anul acesta e cea mai geroasă dintre toate. În unele ţări, unde clima e foarte umedă, plouă nouă luni pe an. La munte verile sunt mai răcoroase decât în alte regiuni.

THE IMPERATIVE (MODUL IMPERATIV)

Exprimă un ordin, un îndemn, o urare, un sfat etc. Se formează astfel: - pentru persoanele I şi III singular şi plural: let + complement in acuzativ + vb. Let me leave home! Let the girl sing! - pentru persoana a II-a : vb. Come here, please! Be quiet! - forma negativă se formează cu ajutorul verbului auxiliar DO: Don’t talk to strangers! Don’t let me wait too long! Auxiliarul DO se foloseste şi în cazul verbelor TO BE si TO HAVE la negativ: Don’t be insolent! Negaţia not pusă după verbul LET este întâlnită în limba literară sau mai formală, mai rar

în conversaţie Let us not work all night! PREPOZIŢII SPAŢIALE Above – deasupra Below – dedesubt Up – sus Down – jos

86

Near to – aproape (lângă) Far from – departe de Close to – aproape Out of – afară (din) Into – în Out – afară Inside – înăuntru Among – printre Between – între Through – prin Over – peste On – pe Under – sub In front of- în faţă Behind – în spatele Exercises: 1) Pass all the sentences below into the negative form: Press that button! Shut the door! Stop arguing! Let’s do it at once! Let her put the bunch of

keys on the table! Let’s meet at six o’clock. Pick up the receiver! Wait a moment! 2) Translate into English (using the prepositions): Plasa de bagaje este deasupra capului tău, n-o vezi?

Ea tocmai a coborat scările. Noi nu te aşteptăm în spatele teatrului, e prea întuneric. Mary n-a coborat încă din maşină.

Locuiţi departe de firma dumneavoastră? Trebuie să fie undeva printre oamenii de acolo. Trecem noi şi peste asta! Asta rămâne între noi!

The Past Tense of the Verb “TO BE”

Afirmativ Negativ Interogativ I was I was not (wasn’t) Was I (not)? You were You were not (weren’t) Were you (not)? He/ she/ it was He/ she/it was not Was he/ she / it (not)? We were (wasn’t) Were we (not)? They were We were not (weren’t) Were they (not)?

They were not (weren’t)

The Past Tense of the Verb “TO HA VE” Afirmativ Negativ Interogativ (negativ) I had I had not (hadn’t) Had I (not)? You had You had not Had you (not)? He/ she/ it had He/ she/ it had not Had he/ she/ it (not)? We had We had not Had we (not)? They had They had not Had they (not)?

Exercises: 1) After reading the comprehension passage carefully, choose the right ending for each

sentence below: A) In my childhood, every holiday that I had seemed a) interesting b) attractive c) ideal B) We used to: a) play football b) make sandcastles with huge yellow walls c) pick-up shells C) When the tide went out a) we climbed over the rocks b) we wrote our names in the sand

87

c) we left the beach D) There were always a) little presents b)sweets c) toys in mother’s pockets. E) Now, when I am an adult, my idea of a holiday is a) quite different b) much the same c) quite the reverse F) When I am old, all I shall want to do will be a) to remember b) to find out which is the ideal holiday for each age c) to read books about happy childhood holidays. 2) Fill in the blanks with the Past Tense of the Verb “to be”: Where............... you yesterday? She...........my friend long time ago. We ................ (neg.)

there last year. Mary .............. a good pupil in high-school. Who .............. that lady you ...............with last evening? Me and Tom ................... at his party last Saturday. Her father...........(not) the mayor of that town ten years ago. When.............they back home last night.

3) Translate into English: Cine a avut ideea să plecăm de la cabană în toiul nopţii? Nu mai era nimeni pe drum la ora aceea. Totuşi erau două maşini parcate lângă o casă părăsită. Poliţistul era la intersecţie şi avea o armă în buzunar. Nu eram siguri că acela este drumul cel bun. Aveam o mulţime de lucruri să-i spun. Ea nu avea destui bani pentru maşina aceea scumpă. Eram atât de fericiţi de rezultatul ei la examen! Care a fost cea mai bună lucrare? Cine a avut dreptate?

THE SIMPLE PAST TENSE

The Simple Past Tense arată o acţiune care s-a desfăşurat într-un moment bine definit din trecut şi s-a încheiat. Momentul de desfăşurare a acţiunii poate fi precizat printr-un adverb de timp definit (yesterday, a day, a week, a month, year ago, last week/ month/ year/ summer etc.) printr-un alt verb la un timp trecut, prin context.

Se formează: Afirmativ: verbe regulate: vb. – ed verbe neregulate: forma a II-a Interogativ did+ subiect + vb? Negativ subiect+ did+not + vb? We stayed home yesterday. When did you call her? They left England last week. She didn’t write this exercise two days ago. Reguli de ortografie la adaugarea terminatiei – ed:

88

– verbele monosilabice şi bisilabice cu accentul pe a doua silabă, terminate într-o singură consoană, precedată de o singură vocală dublează consoana finală: stop = stopped; regret = regretted

– verbele compuse terminate în -p precedat de vocală, respectă regula de mai sus: kidnapped

– -l final se dubleaza in orice situatie: travel – travelled; fulfill -fulfilled (excepţie – unparalleled)

– y precedat de consoana se transforma in -/: marry – married – e final mut cade: decide – decided – ic devine ick: mimic – mimicked Exercises: 1) In the following sentences change the verbs from the Present Tense to the Past Tense: We feel sorry when somebody shoots a dove. Does she like pop music? Where are my

sun-glasses? She drives the car at high speed. The sun rises at 6 a.m. and sets at 7 p.m. Who delivers the mail in your district? She never goes to the dry-cleaner’s, her husband does this for her. I know the words which he spells so badly. Do you like to read detective stories? I don’t want to explain this problem to you again. When he buys a book he never lends it to his friends. We drink to your health and wish you the best. He comes in time whenever he leaves home at 7 a.m.

2) Fill in the blanks with appropriate verbs in the Simple Past: He................................us a long letter that we are going to receive soon. Mr. Smith always....................................an umbrella with him. He................................ football when he was a kid. I never ................................ to the circus when I was a little child. She ............................... in my bedroom but now she is awake. He................................ that contest and was very proud of himself. 3) Put the verbs into the Simple Past: I (see) her yesterday. Where he (lose) his money? I (not smoke) two years ago. They

(understand) everything you (tell) them. Mary (break) her leg and (stay) two months at home. You (enjoy) the party? When they (do) their homework? She (make) many spelling mistakes. Tom (feel) better three days ago. We (can) swim when we (are) younger. I (book) two rooms in this hotel last summer.

4) Translate into English: Cand ati sosit? N-a avut grijă de trandafiri şi au îngheţat, N-a citit cartea asta. Îţi aminteşti unde am pus

revistele ieri? Când am deschis ochii era seară. Părea mai înalt decât mine, semăna cu tatăl lui. Câinele acesta a muşcat două persoane săptămâna trecută.

N-am mâncat nimic, doar am băut suc de fructe. Operaţia a reuşit şi toţi erau fericiţi. Ne-a spus să nu uităm uşa din spate deschisă. S-au căsătorit acum două luni.

THE PAST CONTIUOUS TENSE

The Past Continuous Tense arată o acţiune care s-a desfăşurat în mod continuu şi

neîntrerupt într-o perioadă de timp bine definită din trecut, sau în acelaşi timp cu una sau mai multe acţiuni tot din trecut. Se traduce prin imperfect.

Se formează: Afirmativ: was/were + vb. – ing

89

Interogativ: was/were + subiect + vb. – ing? Negativ: subiect + was/were not + vb. – ing We were reading when they came home. While she was watching TV, we were playing chess. What were you doing when I rang you up? I was having a shower. Exercises: 1) Put the verbs in brackets into Past Simple or Continuous: She heard him playing the piano while she (read). She crossed the street while I (jog).

While she was cleaning the house, the dog (run) away. They (cut) the grass in the garden, when the thief (jump) over me fence. She (have) lunch in the kitchen while I (fix) my bike. I (write) a letter when somebody (knock) at the door. The players (train) a lot yesterday. When the doorbell (sing) she (sleep). The young man (jump) on the bus, while it (run). They (realize) they (travel) in the wrong direction. When they (arrive) it (rain).

2) Translate into English: Când stâteau la masâ, fiul ei i-a spus vestea cea bună. Vânzătorul vorbea cu un client în timp ce un băiat îi fura toate merele. A luat geanta şi-a ieşit pe uşa din spate în timp ce poliţistul aştepta în faţa casei. Când a început să plouă am intrat în cel mai apropiat magazin. Ce făceai ieri pe vremea asta? L-am observat când mă apropiam de staţie Vorbea cu un bătrân când l-am salutat. În timp ce conducea cu viteză mare, o altă maşină se apropia din direcţie opusă. N-am putut să văd filmul pentru că ea repeta rolul pentru spectacol. În timp ce noi aşteptam

să plece trenul, hamalii încă mai cărau bagajele pasagerilor întârziaţi la tren.

THE PAST PERFECT TENSE (SIMPLE, CONTINUOUS)

The Past Perfect Tense exprimă o acţiune trecută, anterioară altei acţiuni din trecut. Are

acelaşi rol de anterioritate faţă de trecut pe care îl are şi timpul Present Perfect faţă de prezent. Se formează:

– afirmativ: had + The Past Participle – interogativ: had + subiect + The Past Participle? – Negativ: subiect + had + not + The Past Participle She came after I had called her several times. I hadn’t understood that problem before you explained it to me. Had she ironed all the shirts when you got home? The Past Perfect Continuous Tense – arată o acţiune care a început într-un moment din

trecut şi s-a desfăşurat în mod continuu şi neîntrerupt până într-un alt moment din trecut. Se formează: – afirmativ: had + been + vb. – ing – interogativ: had + subiect + been + vb. – ing? – negativ: subiect + had + not + been + vb. – ing He had been waiting for an hour in front of the restaurant when she arrived. Exercises: 1) Put the verbs in brackets into the Past Perfect Tense: Yesterday he showed me the new dress she (buy).

90

I knew he (live) in the country before. When he (find) the money she gave in to me. She understood the exercise I (explain) to her. We didn’t know where she (leave). I couldn’t tell you where she (hide) the documents. She came home soon after I (sing) you up. 2) Put the verbs in brackets into the Past Perfect Simple or Continuous: He (already, arrive) when you got to school yesterday. She (work) for 20 years before she finally retired. You (ever, have) a car before you bought that foreign one? Only after she (paint) tens of portraits she earned enough money for a decent life. How long (your father, smoke) when he finally decided to give that habit up? For more than ten years. Mary (already clean) the house when the quests arrived. We (chat) for an hour when you wake up. How long (he like) before he reached the chalet? 3) Translate into English: După ce am mâncat friptura mi-am dat seama că nu era destul pentru mine. Mergeai pe jos

la serviciu înainte să-ţi repari maşina? După ce a înlocuit motorul, maşina era ca nouă. A început să scrie cărţi poliţiste după ce a devenit membru al clubului nostru. Mă simţeam mai rău după ce am băut cafeaua aceea. După ce am admirat peisajul, am făcut şi câteva fotografii.

4) Use the verbs in brackets in the Simple Past Tense, Past Perfect Simple or Continuous

as appropriate: By the time she (reach) Tom’s place, she (forget) what she wanted to tell him. The teacher

(hope) that the students (complete) already their task for some time. As he (feel) rather sick for a week, he (go) to see a doctor. We (wait) for more than half an hour but there (be) no sign of the bus arrival. I (try) to fix my car for two hours when he came to give me a hand. He (eat) all the cookies when we went downstairs. They (rob) many houses before the police could catch them. The orchestra (play) ever since the first guests (get) into the garden.

THE FUTURE TENSE

(SIMPLE, CONTINUOUS, THE NEAR FUTURE) The Simple Future Tense exprimă o acţiune care se va desfăşura într-un moment din viitor.

Se formează: – afirmativ: persoana I: shall + vb. persoana a II-a, a III-a, will + vb. – negativ: subiect + shall/will + not + vb. shall not – shan’t will not – won’t – interogativ: shall/will + subiect + vb.? În vorbirea curentă se foloseşte auxiliarul WILL la toate persoanele. Auxiliarul SHALL

folosit la toate persoanele arată, datorită sensului modal (a trebui) ideea de obligaţie, ordin, certitudine.

You shall come here tomorrow by all means. The Future Continuous Tense arata ca o actiune va fi în curs de desfăşurare într-un moment

bine definit în viitor: Se formează: – afirmativ: persoana I: shall/will + be + vb. – ing

91

persoana a II-a, a III-a: shall/will + be + vb. -ing

– negativ: subiect + shall/will + not + be + vb. – ing – interogativ: shall/will + subiect + be + vb. – ing? – This time tomorrow I shall be flying to Rome. The Near Future (viitorul apropiat) se exprimă prin următoarele construcţii: a) TO BE GOING TO – a avea de gând să, a intenţiona să When are you going to write that letter? b) TO BE TO – a avea de gând să, a intenţiona să, dar când acţiunea a fost planificată She is to go sightseeing next Friday. c) THE PRESENT CONTINUOUS TENSE Why are you leaving tomorrow? d) THE SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE – pentru acţiuni certe, programate. The plane takes off in ten minutes. Exercises: 1) Put the verbs in brackets into the most suitable future form (SimpleFuture, Present

Continuous, to be going to form): I’m tired of steak and chips. I (cook) something special today. Can I offer you something to eat? Yes, I (have) two sandwiches, please. This suitcase is too heavy for him to carry. You (give) him a hand? Where is uncle John? I think you (find) him in the garden. He (plant) a tree. I must leave you for a moment. I (be ) back soon. It’s very cold in here. I (shut) the window. The phone is ringing. I (get) it. 2) Fill in the blanks with Simple Future or Going to future: “I would like you to come with me”. I ask if it’s possible. “Are you sure we ...................................... get in?” Of course we ............................. If you.......................................... smoke, please go to the kitchen. At Mary’s party I .............................................wear my red dress again. I ........................................ go and buy some bread for you if you need. They ......................................... (marry) next week. Why are you laying the table? We ..............have guests at lunch. 3) Translate into English: Mâine pe vremea asta voi înota în mare. Va veni cu vechiul tău prieten, sau singur? Am de

gând să nu-ţi mai spun o vorbă. Ce vei face dacă nu te sună la timp? Sunt sigur că mâine voi pescui mai mulţi peşti decât tine. Anunţă-ne unde vei pleca. El se va face bine. Mă tem ca nu-l vor înţelege pentru că nu ştiu engleza. Promit că acest lucru nu se va întâmpla niciodată. Cred că va fi cel mai bun student şi anul viitor. Cine va ţine acest curs de două ori pe săptămână? Va fi de acord să plece într-o staţiune balneoclimaterică? Târgul de vară se va deschide în luna iunie. Discursul lui se va concentra asupra reabilitării turismului în ţara noastră.

92

93

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alice Bădescu, Gramatica Limbii Engleze, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, 1984. Edith Ilovici, Limba Engleza – Texte de Specialitate, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică,

Bucureşti, 1968. Nick Kenny, Jacky Newbrook and Richard Acklam, Gold Plus, Pearson Lonman, 2008. Michael Vince, Advanced Language Practice, Macmillan Publishers Limited, 1998. Mihail M. Alexandrescu, Puterea Domniei în Ţara Românească şi Moldova, Bucureşti, 1999. Translated by Argentina Velea Stephen In Wood, A History of London, Macmillan Publishers, London, 1998. Virginia Evans, Practice Tests, Express Publishing, 2001.